The following piece was originally published by American Renaissance, on September 21, 2018.
There exist at least two lefts: the socialist left and the cosmopolitan left. One promotes income equality and the planned economy; the other promotes the erasure of nations, the leveling of races and cultures, the abolition of physical and moral boundaries. Among liberals [libertarians, free-marketers], some oppose opening borders to mass immigration, but denounce only socialism rather than cosmopolitanism—as if opening borders were only a modality of socialism, another way of redistributing the incomes from rich countries towards the migrants from poor countries.
This intellectual and moral mistake plays into the hands of the transnational elites who manipulate the political life in Western nations—a group I call the world superclass. In daring to denounce cosmopolitanism, National Liberalism—the movement of which I am a part—defends sovereign nations and opposes the global superclass. National Liberalism does not care only about economic freedoms; it fights to safeguard the bio-cultural identity of nations.
Emergence of national-liberalism on the French political stage
The election of Donald Trump and the entry into government by Sebastian Kurz and Heinz Christian Strache in Austria and Matteo Salvini in Italy are serious setbacks for the world superclass. In France, Emmanuel Macron has been appointed by the European elites to stem the tide of Western “populism.” Founded and chaired by Henry de Lesquen, the Parti National-Libéral [in English: National-Liberal Party, or National-Libertarian Party], intends to lead the right.
In only a few months, Henry de Lesquen has become what the newspaper Les Inrocks calls “the emblem of extreme right-wing people” in opposition to the Macron presidency. The PNL is an offshoot of the Carrefour de l’Horloge, a circle of political and metapolitical thought—also led by Henry de Lesquen—which has been promoting national-liberalism for more than 40 years. The PNL also endorses archeofuturism, developed by the philosopher Guillaume Faye, one of the founders of the “new right” in the 1970s.
The growing enthusiasm of young people for the PNL comes essentially from its rejection of the left in its entirety—both of cosmopolitanism and socialism. The PNL attacks as much the socialism of the Front National of the Le Pen family as the cosmopolitanism of the soft-right Republicans led by Laurent Wauquiez. In line with the National Council of European Resistance of Renaud Camus, the PNL denounces invasion by migrants and promotes the re-emigration of African and Arab-Muslim colonizers. No other party dares pronounce itself in favor of re-emigration—not even the Front National.
Stranglehold of anti-racism over legislation
As Vice President of the Parti National-Libéral, I intend to discuss how anti-racism contributes to the migratory subversion of white, Christian France. Anyone who intends seriously to fight cultural Islamisation, and the loss of the racial identity must denounce the invasion from Africa and the Middle East. Anyone who intends to fight the invasion should fight the anti-racism that prohibits the nation from defending its territory and its bio-cultural identity. Anyone who intends to fight the “great replacement,” which anti-racism triggers and protects, should demand the re-emigration of migrants.
By anti-racism, is to understood the dogma that does not only deny the existence of race in biology, but prohibits the nation and individuals from practicing any form of discrimination or agression on the basis of race, be it biological race or the race of the spirit—conceived of as a web of ways of thinking, feeling, and acting that define a given people or ethnicity. Anti-racism also forbids revisionist or negationist speech about the Holocaust, which is considered an offense against Jewish ethnicity.
The climate of guilt and repentance after the Second World War greatly helped the proponents of anti-racism to shape legislation in accordance with their ideology. There were two decisive stages: the Pleven Law of 1972 created the crimes of racially motivated libel or defamation, and punished incitement to racial discrimination, hatred, or violence. The Gayssot law of 1990, was passed to “suppress any racist, anti-Semitic, or xenophobic act,” and forbids questioning the existence of crimes against humanity, including genocide by gas chambers.
This legal framework, coupled with several decades of free immigration, has allowed what appears to be the ultimate goal of anti-racism: the great replacement. That expression, which we owe to Renaud Camus, refers to the bio-cultural alteration that mass immigration inflicts on the French people. While the cultural identity of the French people changes under the effect of Islamisation, its racial or genetic identity changes under the effect of miscegenation. Another term for this process could be genocide by substitution. In addition to the slow death of the French people, the migratory invasion brings in its wake all kinds of delinquent behavior that is not adequately kept in check by the judicial system and that culminates into Islamic terrorism.
From anti-racism to the negationism of the genocide by substitution
To use the terminology of Vilfredo Pareto, ideologies most often serve as “derivations” justifying values and interests that are camouflaged and formally rejected by those very ideologies, what Pareto called “residues.” Thus, anti-racism serves as a screen for anti-white racism and anti-Jewish racism, just as socialism, theoretically egalitarian, serves as a screen for the sharp income and status inequalities in such places as Venezuela, North Korea, and the old Soviet Union. Anti-racism sanctions negationism insofar as it concerns the genocide by gas chambers; however, it very well accommodates itself with the negationism that consists in denying the reality of the great replacement.
Anti-racism has erected the denial of the genocide by substitution into state-sponsored denialism, which reflects the complicity of the French political class with the African and Arab-Muslim occupation. It is worth remembering that anti-racism is only one part of the cosmopolitanism that has inspired French legislation for several decades, and that has also brought radical feminism, unconditional abortion rights, a lax judiciary, and LGBT propaganda. Nevertheless, the number one enemy of France and the West remains—in the long run—Islam.
Islam was invading Europe, and threatening to destroy Christianity, even when Europe was not cosmopolitan, and the threat of Islam cannot be met only in economic terms. Stopping welfare payments for migrants will not be enough to induce re-emigration. It will not soften the will to power. Re-emigration requires a military response to African and Arab-Muslim occupation. On this issue, there should naturally be an alliance between France and Israel; they have common challenges of terrorism and submersion by migration. Such an alliance is also an affront to the global superclass that barely conceals its anti-Zionism.
Not long ago, in an attempt to arouse pity for the occupiers from Africa or the Middle East, President Macron compared them to deported Jews. There is no doubt that the prohibition against doubting the reality of the Holocaust facilitated the establishment of the legal framework of anti-racism. The decision to forbid Holocaust denial—and the anti-Jewish sentiment that underlies denial—consolidated the anti-racist legislation that makes it impossible to speak truthfully about the demographic change that has become the instrument of genocide by substitution. The French may neither deny the reality of genocide by gas chamber nor recognize the reality of genocide by substitution.
Whether their enemies are Nazis (in the context of the genocide by gas chambers) or Muslims (in the context of the genocide by substitution), Jews are always on the front line among the victims of racism or anti-racism. One must appreciate the irony: The sanctification of the Holocaust, the legal prohibition against doubting the crimes committed by Nazis against Jews, is part of a legal arsenal that prevents resistance to the crimes committed by Muslims against Jews—and against us all.
Anti-racism, the denier and the accomplice of anti-Jewish racism
This patent hypocrisy of anti-racism—which exploits and distorts the fight against anti-Semitism in a way that promotes the great replacement—is all the more obvious as Muslims who make judeophobic or revisionist statements are almost never punished. Muslim attacks against Jews are almost never prosecuted as hate crimes. This will get worse as Muslims continue to enter the ranks of the police and judiciary.
Muslims are plagued and bewitched by hatred towards Jews—not only because the Quran refers to Jews as the number-one enemy, but also because Israel is, in the eyes of Muslims, the quintessence of the impious West. Islamic violence is not content with making Jews a priority target; it uses the horrors inflicted on Jews to warn the West, to alert gentiles that the same fate awaits them. The terrorism that accompanies the great replacement begins by striking at Jews, only to rain down violence on all Westerners.
Yet some people believe in a Jewish plot to orchestrate the great replacement and promote terrorism. It is worth remembering that cosmopolitanism, which is a Hellenic invention, has no roots in Judaism. It is certainly a fact that cosmopolitanism is now defended by some Jewish intellectual elites, but they are decadents who represent only themselves. They despise the community from which they come, and seem to have little sympathy for the Jews who fall under the blows of Muslims.
Cosmopolitanism runs counter to the sacred texts of Judaism. The civilizational manifestation of the Old Testament, the Talmud, or Kabbalah is not cosmopolitanism, let alone bourgeois materialism. It is the sovereign nation, homogeneous in terms of race, and aristocratic-warlike in terms of values. George Soros’s “open society” is an ideal that owes nothing to Judaism; it owes everything to the Gnostic heresy of Christianity and the cosmopolitanism of Diogenes the Cynic.
From dismantling anti-racism to setting up re-emigration
In the end, here are measures we believe to be justified in view of the subversive character of anti-racism. The legislation criminalizing the denial of the gas chambers should be dismantled—if only because the prohibition against Holocaust denial has disproportionately publicized the issue. The need to preserve the bio-cultural identity of France should be affirmed in the constitution. Accordingly, the anti-racist dogma, which protects migratory invasions from Africa and the Middle East, should be declared incompatible with the foundations of the Republic.
In addition to closing the borders to mass immigration, there should be re-emigration of non-indigenous population—on a military, not just economic, basis. France should stop its friendly—not to say complacent and suicidal—policy towards Arab-Muslim nations, and establish a military and economic partnership with Israel. Ideally, the fight for the re-emigration of Palestinian colonizers out of Israeli territory would go hand in hand with the fight for the re-emigration of African and Arab-Muslim colonizers from French territory.
Naturally, such a program will not fail to arouse accusations of racism. The truth is that there is not a scintilla of racism about wanting to prevent the great replacement, and wanting to preserve the French people and their culture. Racism would be calling for the exploitation of other races. There is nothing supremacist or disdainful about wanting to stop immigration and promote re-emigration; it is patriotism.
The cosmopolitan treats immigrants as modern slaves—a cheap, easily tamed workforce. He is a humanitarian who feels a neocolonial superiority towards the good savage, whom he sees as necessarily harmless; the nationalist recognizes that foreigners have an intense will to power and knows that they are capable of making history. The greatest success of anti-racism is to treat foreigners as if they are expendable workers with no capacity to change our country from top to bottom while denouncing those who think otherwise. Ironically, it is we, the patriots, who have far more respect for power and determination of those who are gradually colonizing and replacing us.
Grégoire Canlorbe is the vice president of the French Parti National-Libéral (“National-Liberal Party,” nationalist, free-marketist, and archeofuturist). He is the author of A Conversation with Former Czech President Václav Klaus, A Conversation with Renaud Camus, and “Why the Right Should Espouse Climate-Realism.”