“Become other than White”: Ireland and Radical Jewish Activism

“Become other than White”: Ireland and Radical Jewish Activism

August 30, 2019/86 Comments/in Featured Articles /by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.

 

 

“Five Jews came from over sea with gifts to Tairdelbach [King of Munster], and they were sent back again over sea.”
           Annals of Inisfallen, 1079 A.D.

“I propose an interrogation of how the Irish nation can become other than white (Christian and settled), by privileging the voices of the racialised, and subverting state immigration, but also integration, policies.”
Ronit Lentin (Israeli academic), From racial state to racist state: Ireland on the eve of the citizenship referendum, 2007.

Prelude

Tairdelbach of Munster (Turlough O’Brien 1009–86), who was, by 1079, effectively the High King of Ireland, probably holds the world record for the fastest expulsion of Jews. He dominated the Irish political scene, had crushed the Viking leadership of Dublin, and possessed “the standard of the King of the Saxons.” His son had even commenced raids into Wales and the British coast. Unfortunately, we can only surmise the nuances of the 70-year-old warlord’s reaction to the sudden arrival of a handful of gift-bearing Jews, because the Annals of Inisfallen are thin on detail. The delegation almost certainly originated in Normandy, where Jews thrived under a symbiotic financial relationship with William the Conqueror. William, of course, had introduced Jews to Anglo-Saxon England thirteen years before the approach to Tairdelbach, leaving open the possibility they could have travelled directly to Ireland from one of these new Jewish enclaves in England. In any event, it is almost certain that they arrived seeking permission to settle in Ireland’s urban centers, forge a relationship with the Irish elite (Tairdelbach himself), and engage in exploitative moneylending among the lower social orders. This was a pattern that had hitherto been witnessed throughout Europe. And yet Tairdelbach’s reaction was to reject the gifts and immediately expel the Jews. They would not be able to form a community in Ireland for several centuries.
It’s probably no coincidence that Tairdelbach was regarded in his lifetime as a good and Christian king. He enjoyed close relationships with the Irish church, and the church in England, and was patron to a number of religious figures and scholars. He was almost certainly a literate and educated man, and his decision to expel the Jewish delegation may have been based on a body of knowledge rather than mere instinct. Historians Aidan Beatty and Dan O’Brien comment on the expulsion:

No one in Ireland had ever seen a Jewish person prior to this incident, yet the visitors are unambiguously described as “five Jews” (coicer Iudaide) and the Irish people already have a word for Jews, Iudaide, a medieval Gaelic word that clearly has its roots in the languages of classical antiquity. But more than that paradox, there is also a certain kind of cultural knowledge at work here. The medieval Irish who gave such short shrift to these Jewish guests “know” something about Jews, or more accurately they think some things about Jews: they “know” that Jews are not trustworthy, that Jews bearing gifts are not to be taken into one’s care. And Jews are not suitable for residence in Ireland – they should be expelled from the country.^[1]

The impression is therefore that Tairdelbach was a savvy and selfless leader, who sought the good of his people more than the good of his own short-term financial situation.
Jewish revenge, direct or indirect, occurred a century later, when the glory days of the Gaelic High Kings like Tairdelbach came to an end thanks to the Norman invasion of Ireland by Richard “Strongbow” de Clare. In common with the Norman invasion of England, Strongbow was financed by Jews, in this case an England-based Jewish financier named Josce of Gloucester. After the Norman invasion, the new Norman elite brought a small number of their Jews into Ireland, primarily for financial activities at ports rather than large-scale settlement. A grant dated 28 July 1232 by King Henry III to Peter de Rivel gave him the office of Treasurer and Chancellor of the Irish Exchequer, the king’s ports and coast, and also “the custody of the King’s Judaism in Ireland.” These few nameless Jews would have been dispensed with after the expulsion from England in 1290, and Jews were absent from Ireland until the time of Cromwell, who also holds a special place of notoriety in Irish history.
By following in the wake of the Normans and the English, the Jews have certainly placed themselves on a dubious historical trajectory in relation to the Irish. But perhaps nothing seen in the past compares with what is seen in the present. Because it is globalism that has now invaded Ireland, and Jewish activists are shaping the thought and policies of the new global-imperial culture.

Mass Migration and Indoctrination

Between 2002 and 2016, the proportion of the Irish population born abroad rose from 5.8% to more than 17%.^[2] Given the relatively small population of Ireland, if the current pace of immigration persists, the Irish stand to be overwhelmed in their ancient homeland in the coming decades. The biggest increases have come in the form of growing numbers of Pakistanis, Romanian gypsies, Afghans (an increase of 212% on the previous census), and Syrians (an increase of 199% on the previous census). Ireland has also become home to a large and rapidly growing African population, which has been described by University College Dublin academic Philip O’Connell as being mired in “exceptionally high unemployment rates.” 

The African population has also presented some novel difficulties for the Irish police who have had to bust a West African fraud ring in Dublin and Meath, contend with Black gangs attacking each other with machetes in the middle of busy roads, deal with the aftermath of gang rapes carried out by Nigerians on teenage girls in Kildare, sustain several attacks on police by Nigerian drug gangs, deal with one particularly nasty rape and murder of a young Irish mother by a Nigerian immigrant, and attempt to control an African gang called The Pesties who “have been terrorising people prominently in the west and north of Dublin, carrying out vicious assaults on delivery drivers and taxi men.”
African and Muslim cab drivers have also been behind a large and growing number of rapes and sexual assaults (for example, see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here). In fact, sexual offences in Ireland increased by 17% between 2017 and 2018. In financial terms, the expanding asylum process is costing the Irish government more than €1 billion every five years, and in the midst of an Irish housing crisis, immigration is putting immense pressure on every aspect of the nation’s infrastructure.

Strangely, the Irish media hasn’t been making much of this aspect of Ireland’s changing complexion. Instead, much discussion has taken place on the fact Ireland has no real “hate crime” laws with the exception of the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act 1989, which has managed to achieve a grand total of five criminal convictions in the last 30 years. 
Dr Ali Selim, of the Islamic Cultural Centre in Dublin, has said “there is a desperate need for hate crime legislation. Today we have a wide range of diversity and faiths and that increases the need to have hate crime legislation.” In a way, I agree with Dr Selim, because diversity inevitably means restrictions on the freedoms of the native population. More migrants mean more laws to protect those migrants from criticism.

But, despite the interventions of Dr Selim, the origins of Irish conceptions of “racism” and “hate speech” don’t lie among the growing Muslim population, but among a very small number of influential Jews. In 1969, some 890 years after Tairdelbach expelled the Norman-Jewish delegation, a young Jewish sociologist arrived in Ireland from Israel. Ronit Lentin, the sociologist in question, was Associate Professor of Sociology in Trinity College Dublin until her retirement in 2014. From 1997 until 2012 Lentin was Head of Sociology, and acted as director of the MPhil program in “Race, Ethnicity, Conflict.” She was also the founder of the Trinity Immigration Initiative, from which she advocated an open-door immigration policy for Ireland and opposed all deportations, as well as engaging in activism to liberalise Irish abortion laws.^[3] As an academic and “anti-racist” activist, Lentin formulated what would become some of the cardinal facets of Irish self-recrimination on matters of race, beginning with her definition of Ireland as “a biopolitical racist state.”^[4] By her own account, before she began her work on stoking Irish race guilt in the early 1990s, “most people were not conscious that Irish racism existed.”^[5]

In some senses, then, Lentin introduced the concept of an Irish racism. Her first step in assuring the Irish that they were indeed racist was to deny their existence as a people. She asserted that the Irish were merely “theorised as homogeneous — white, Christian and settled.”^[6] Quite who had developed this theory of the Irish, and when, was never specified by Lentin, nor did she attempt to show that the white, Christian, and settled status of the vast majority of the Irish population was anything other than a matter of fact and reality. It appears to have sufficed for Lentin simply to assert that Irishness was nothing but a theory, and to leave it at that. She was particularly aggrieved by the fact the Irish, apparently unaware they were a figment of their own imagination, voted (80%) to link citizenship and blood (ending “birth-right citizenship) by constitutionally differentiating between citizen and non-citizen in a June 2004 Citizenship Referendum. This move was taken primarily in order to stop African “birth tourism” and “anchor babies” by African women, which had become increasingly common by the early 2000s. To Lentin, however, the move was symbolic of the fact “the Irish Republic had consciously and democratically become a racist state.”^[7] She concludes that any idea of the Irish as historical victims should be dispensed with, and that “Ireland’s new position as heading the Globalisation Index, its status symbol as the locus of “cool” culture, and its privileged position within an ever-expanding European Community calls for re-theorising Irishness as white supremacy.”^[8] [emphasis added]

So, in Lentin’s worldview, Irishness is not only a fiction, but a racist, white supremacist fiction. Lentin’s advice to the Irish, should they wish to rid themselves of the delusion of peoplehood, is to enagage in mass celebrations of “diversity and integration and multiracialism and multiculturalism and interculturalism,”^[9] Lentin adds: “I propose an interrogation of how the Irish nation can become other than white.” Keeping up the family tradition, Ronit Lentin’s daughter Alana moved to Australia a few years ago, where she quickly established herself as an equally rabid promoter of White guilt and engaged in successive critiques of Australian “racism.” She is now President of the Australian Critical Race and Whiteness Studies Association, and has penned articles for The Guardian asserting that Australian identity is are fictional as that of the Irish, and demanding Australia adopt an open borders policy so that it too can become other than white.

If Ronit Lentin’s activism can be regarded as cultural sabotage, then that of her co-ethnic Alan Shatter could be regarded as nothing less than legislative warfare. Shatter, an Irish-born Jew, has been discussed previously at The Occidental Observer, but not since 2013. Shatter’s impact on Ireland has been extraordinary, and is difficult to exaggerate. His first targets in government were the weakening of legislative controls that helped maintain stability in the family (via the Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Act 1989), and the gradual erosion of highly conservative Irish laws on contraception (by writing the 1979 satirical tract Family Planning — Irish Style, featuring mocking illustrations designed by co-ethnic artist Chaim Factor). He has also been a strident pro-abortion activist since at least 1983, and a very early proponent of homosexual marriage and the adoption of children by homosexuals (he was essentially the author of both bills). Shatter was also central to the founding of the Oireachtas (Parliamentary) Committee on Foreign Affairs, something he then used as a vehicle to pursue Zionist-friendly objectives. In 2013 The Times of Israel reported “Israel may finally have some luck with the Irish” because “Israel could not have a more understanding or reliable Irish ally than Shatter, a stalwart supporter even during times of controversy. Occasionally combative, he has been highly critical of previous governments’ strident criticisms of Israel, and he hasn’t retreated from subsequent abuse.” The article made sure to celebrate the fact Shatter enjoyed “an exceptionally influential position in the Irish government” as both defense and justice minister, and noted that he “was particularly active during the 1980s and ’90s in advocating for divorce and family-planning rights. His urbane Jewish background appeared to put him at an advantage, freeing him from the baggage that weighed on his Catholic counterparts.”

Alan Shatter

But it was in his efforts in the field of immigration that Shatter demonstrated real revolutionary zeal. Between 2011 and 2014, Shatter utterly transformed the Irish citizenship process, personally granting Irish citizenship to 69,000 foreign nationals. In August 2013 he took steps to expand the Irish asylum process, citing the Syrian Civil War as the reason but later conceding that the highest number of asylum applications was actually coming from Nigerians and Pakistanis. In fact, Shatter was so keen to boost the number of Africans entering Ireland that the rejection rate for African asylum applications dropped from 47% to 3% as soon as he took office. He was so celebrated in Africa that he won the Africa World Man of the Year Award in 2012. Many of these asylum seekers, primarily Nigerians, have gone on to terrorise and assault their hosts, while others have been noted as publicly masturbating in their cabs during rush hour while they wait for customers. In 2013, Shatter proposed a new bill that would grant an amnesty to the thousands of illegal immigrants accumulating in Ireland. And, in contrast with the reality of mass immigration — crime, stretched resources, and the breaking down of a sense of community — Shatter announced in 2014 that Ireland had to do more to “speak out and combat racism and related intolerance” because:

This recent migration … has had a transformative impact on Irish society – and, for the better. Persons of non-Irish origin are playing an increasingly important role in many walks of life, not least in sport, and have greatly enhanced the social, cultural and economic fabric of our society. It is important that Ireland remains a nation which welcomes those who have already settled here and will do so in the future. It is equally important that we adapt to the increasingly diverse nature of Irish society.

When Shatter was forced to resign in May 2014 following a policing controversy, it was the incomplete state of his immigration reforms that he told the press was one of his biggest regrets. He told the Irish Times that one of his “big frustrations” upon leaving office was the failure to publish “very comprehensive” legislation in relation to immigration, residency and asylum, and explained that he was “very disappointed” that his party colleague and successor Minister for Justice Frances Fitzgerald appeared to be opting for a less revolutionary Bill. He added:

Unfortunately, the Bill I thought I would see published at least 18 months ago was on the back-burner waiting to be dealt with … There was also great pressure to try and fragment that legislation and deal solely with the asylum issue and not deal with the very important reforms needed in the immigration area. I was concerned if we dealt with the asylum area alone, we would never see the comprehensive Bill that is needed. [The revised Bill] will not deal with overall immigration reforms which are badly needed.

Although Shatter was forced into early retirement, much damage had already been done, and his legacy will continue.

If Shatter and Lentin weren’t enough, Twitter recently erupted due the recent emergence of Laura Weinstein, a New York PhD who now lives in Ireland and claims to be an expert in Irish history and culture. Of all the aspects of Irish history and culture she could have chosen to focus on, however, Dr Weinstein has decided she is most interested, like Lentin, in the “myth” of a homogeneous Irish identity and “right wing Irish nationalism,” and appears to employ her Twitter account, to a large degree, to the trolling of Irish political figures opposed to mass immigration. Several days ago, for example, she responded to a post by the National Party pointing out that multiculturalism essentially results in identity crisis for all in society by basically implying that Irish opposition to immigration would leave the Irish like “neurotic” “inbred” “dogs.” She wrote: “Gene flow as a result of immigration prevents the negative impact of inbreeding. But, go ahead and constrain migration and gene flow if you want to create a race of humans that reflects the neuroticism of “pure bred” dogs. Just be sure to hold a referendum on inbreeding first.”

Now, I’ve lived in Ireland for long periods during my life, and have shown American, German, Finnish, and South African friends around the country. They were all fascinated with the landscape, music, ancient history, and food, but, unlike this Jewish woman, I can’t recall a single instance where one of them was in any way concerned with the genetic homogeneity of the Irish. And not only is Weinstein’s fixation exceedingly strange and unsettling, it’s also fanciful. Genetic studies have shown the Irish already possess a diverse gene pool in the form of genetic clusters of Scandinavian, Norman-French, British, and Iberian origin. This is of course a considerably wider gene pool than that of Dr Weinstein’s Ashkenazi Jews, who are all descended from a single group of 350 individuals.

Needless, to say, Dr Weinstein provoked a robust reaction from Twitter because of her response to the National Party, which in turn led her to make the even more extraordinary claim that “No one loves Ireland more than I do.”
We can be sure that Lentin and Shatter would say the same thing. And perhaps they do love Ireland, but not the Ireland that was, and has been for millennia, but the Ireland that “is becoming” and is “to be” — the Ireland overcome by globalism, with an international population devoid of the “white supremacy” of Irishness. 
Perhaps they love the Ireland of gay pride parades and the arid metallic stench of the abortion mills. 
Perhaps they love the Ireland touched by Nigeria, the one sprinkled with mosques, and where young White mothers hang themselves in homeless despair while asylum seekers are housed and fed mere yards away. 
Perhaps they do indeed feel some kind of love, and they see what they’ve done, and are doing, as the bringing of gifts to Ireland.
But Tairdelbach’s lesson of a thousand years ago is that you don’t have to accept them.

---

^[1] A. Beatty & D. O’Brien, Irish Questions and Jewish Questions: Crossovers in Culture (New York: Syracuse University Press, 2018), 1.
^[2] S. Garner (2007). Ireland and immigration: explaining the absence of the far right. Patterns of Prejudice, 41(2) 109–130, 5.
^[3] See Lentin, R. (2013). A Woman Died: Abortion and the Politics of Birth in Ireland. Feminist Review, 105(1), 130–136.
^[4] R. Lentin, After Optimism? Ireland, Racism and Globalisation (Dublin: Metro Eireann Publications, 2006), 3.
^[5] Ibid., 1.
^[6] Ibid., 2.
^[7] Ibid., 55.
^[8] Ibid., 107.
^[9] Ibid., 165.

A Race War Prophecy : Guillaume Faye, «Ethnic Apocalypse: The Coming European Civil War»

A Race War Prophecy

September 8, 2019/94 Comments/in Featured Articles /by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.

 

 

Ethnic Apocalypse: The Coming European Civil War
Guillaume Faye
Arktos, 2019.


“A confrontation has become indispensable if we are to resolve the problem, remediate the situation and free ourselves.”
                                                         Guillaume Faye, Ethnic Apocalypse

The celebrated French far-Right intellectual Guillaume Faye passed away in March, after a long battle with cancer, but not before leaving us a literary parting shot that deserves to be a bestseller. In his final book, Faye explores the demographic, cultural, political, and military degradation of France, drawing sobering lessons for the West as a whole. The book makes a number of stark and terrifying predictions that, when all current trends are taken into consideration, have an overwhelming probability of coming to fruition. 
Foremost among these predictions is that the West is now almost certainly destined to convulse with a savage and intense civil war (both civil and internal, both religious and racial) without parallel in the history of mankind. 
With all the dark candour one might expect from a dying man with nothing else to lose, Ethnic Apocalypse, or as it was published in French Guerre civile raciale (A Racial Civil War), is perhaps the most brutally frank, bitterly scathing, and searingly honest accounts of the current trajectory of the multicultural West that I’ve ever come across. 
The reader searches the text for euphemism, finding none. There are no evasions here; no duplicity in nomenclature. Faye doesn’t speak of cultural differences, or religious incompatibilities. He has little time for talk of assimilation and integration. 
The problem, he declares, “is neither ideological nor even religious in nature, but, in fact, anthropological. And so is the solution. The coming war will involve people who have nothing to say to one another and who should never have been made to live together.”^[1] 

A little over 50 years after Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech, Faye’s book is both a nod to Powell’s prescience, and a chronicle of the nascent ebbs and waves of a crimson tide that now seems fated to engulf us all.
The volume opens with a heartfelt preface by Jared Taylor, who appears to have been appropriately affected by its contents and describes the text as “certainly the darkest, bravest, and frankest book my friend has ever written. It is a brilliant analysis of the mortal threat to us of massive non-white immigration.”^[2] 
Arktos, the publisher of the English translation, then offer a brief note explaining the change in title from the “intentionally incendiary” French, pointing to the fact “the original title would render this book a magnet to our contemporary censors, who would work under the curious pretext, no doubt, that any book which speaks of a racial civil war in its title must surely be advocating the same.”^[3] 
It is a credit to Arktos that they haven’t changed anything other than the title of this book which, while not necessarily advocating for race war, certainly doesn’t shy away from considering or even desiring the positive results that might arise from such an eventuality. 
As Arktos make clear, “many of the ideas the reader will encounter herein are harsh and hard to look upon, but they are genuine and astute; they are a serious man’s assessment of what he regarded as a coming emergency of continental, if not global proportions.”^[4] 
And with the conclusion of these preambles, explanations, and caveats, Faye’s final book gets underway.

==In the first chapter, “Diagnosis Before the Storm,” Faye outlines the fundamentals of the problem facing Europe and those of European origin. He begins with a list of murders and atrocities committed in France, including the slaughter of a priest by Muslims during Mass and massacres in Paris, Nice, and other provincial French towns. He points to an “ever-increasing criminality involving clearly identified perpetrators whose ethnic origins is often concealed by the official media,” and a “growing difficulty for the native population to coexist with African and Oriental immigrants who are increasingly aggressive, demanding and violent.”^[5] 
What surprises Faye is that “we have not yet registered any defensive reaction on the part of this formerly valiant people or that of other European countries, let along the beginning of any sort of retaliation against Arab and black Muslims, who bear the sole responsibility for all of these crimes.”^[6] 
The response thus far has been that one “snivels and proceeds to place candles and flowers where massacres have occurred,” something that the author attributes to both a loss of collective energy (the lower socio-professional classes have been wearied by incoming populations whose “cruelty remains unequalled”) and to a state that targets any identitarian awakening with repressive measures.^[7] 
Faye argues that Whites (he specifically uses the term throughout the text after stating “let us state the facts as they are’), are “leading miserable and exasperated lives, are weary of being deprived of their tranquility” but that “an unpredictable spark” may yet cause them in “a spirit of self-defence, to organise themselves and  ultimately launch a counter-offensive.”^[8]
Faye is unapologetic about speaking bluntly and specifically of race. He employs the term “as part of a sincere longing for accuracy.”^[9] Some people find the term disagreeable? The author responds:

Do you know what is really unpleasant, by contrast? Living your life surrounded by ten million, twenty million, or even a greater number of Africans and Arabs, with whom one never wanted to associate. What is very disagreeable indeed is acknowledging the thought that, soon enough, the people of our race, namely the Whites of Europe, will be a minority in their own lands. What is more unpleasant is our inability to describe the very horror of our situation without burdening our statement of the facts with foolish periphrases and politically correct words, all of which remain less expressive of what is crucial for us to say than of what one is required to say.^[10]

Again and again, Faye hammers home the racial reality of the our situation, and is biting and scathing in his descriptions of those who have flooded Europe. 
He describes a reality where “our peaceful French men and women” are “mocked, attacked, raped and killed every day by individuals belonging to non-European races.”^[11] 

These “foreign and belligerent races” have “come to have their cake and eat ours.” They “want to reap the benefits of Western prosperity without having to make the same effort we have made in order to enjoy it, while simultaneously retaining their own identity and hating us most openly. They perceive us as being foreign and will continue to do so; it thus seems fair to me that we should regard them in the same manner.”^[12] For Faye, “these third-world immigrants are not worth a penny,”^[13] and African immigration to France, and more generally to Europe, “is an abomination and must be brought to an end as soon as possible.”^[14]

Faye reflects for several pages on the novelty of race war, remarking that while Europeans may in the past have driven back invaders and occupiers as part of a Reconquista movement that ended with the liberation of Greece in the early nineteenth century, these invaders “did not enjoy such demographic superiority” as they do in the present, and they were historically “perceived as foreign occupiers with their own army”^[15] rather than being embedded in our societies in the fashion they are today. 
Because of the overlapping elements (religion, race, and treason among Whites), Faye predicts that “this war will therefore be characterised by a very high intensity resulting from the multiplication of its explosive causes, since the conflict will simultaneously be a civil and internal one, an ethnic one, a religious one and a racial one. An unheard-of event in Europe.”^[16]

The author also remarks that the conflict is “probably inevitable,” due to the “huge and constantly accelerating wave of colonising immigration” and the fact most of these immigrants possess a “hatred combining resentment with a desire for revenge.”^[17] 
Tensions are building further because the secret services have designated the retaliatory actions of native groups, rather than Muslim or immigrant aggressors, as the main danger to French society, an aspect of what Faye calls the French state’s “Collaborationist Tropism.”^[18] 

This is part of a much wider problem – the fact that in modernity “democracy imposes invasion upon peoples.”^[19] 
 Citing Angela Merkel’s flooding of Germany with millions of non-Whites, Faye remarks: “The underlying purpose is for the system to impose upon ethnic peoples  —  upon Whites, to be perfectly clear — an invasion at the hands of foreign masses of illegal immigrants and to force them to accept the destruction of their own living environment and culture.” 

Parliamentary democracy, in reality a “putrid oligarchy,” is “guilty of paving the way for an ethno-racial civil war not only in Western Europe (beginning with France itself), but perhaps also in the United States and Canada.”^[20]
Faye asserts that the worst possible progression would be that this mass invasion occurred “smoothly,” but that we have instead encountered “terrorist violence, delinquency and nuisance.” 
This has made it more difficult to disguise the fact “that a conflict with these foreigners is underway.”^[21] 
Conflict is therefore always preferable to “surrender without fighting — a progressive agony characterised by demographic and cultural disappearance, population replacement and Islamisation.” Faye is adamant in his insistence that

A confrontation has become indispensable if we are to resolve the problem, remediate the situation and free ourselves. In this regard, these Islamist provocations, who purpose is to spark off a civil war, are dialectically positive for us Whites and perhaps even suicidal for them if the events result in our awakening. If one keeps pulling the sleeping tiger by the tail, it will awaken.^[22]

The book presents a racial civil war as potentially cathartic, solving “the generally delinquent, criminal, hostile, provocative and parasitic behaviour of a large part of these populations who, in all areas of our daily life, render all cohabitation unbearable.”^[23] Faye argues:

It may turn out to be necessary to go through such events in order to salvage what is essential, because an ethnic and cultural war, in the event that we do emerge victorious, will rid us once and for all of the main problem, of the evil which, although never clearly formulated, is common knowledge to us all and has been gnawing at France and Western Europe: the immigration stemming from low-IQ Africa, the gradual colonisation of our territories, and the destruction of our identity. In short, our future disappearance from history books.^[24]

==In the book’s next chapter, “The Conquest of Europe is Underway,” Faye surveys the recent influx of millions of Muslims into Europe, and points to some of those “degenerate whites and impudent Jews” who have orchestrated it and cheered it on. ^[25] 
He describes the current phase of mass migration as “more important and much more serious than the two world wars of 1914-1918 and 1939-1945 and Soviet Communism (1917-1991).”^[26] 

These migrants “have no reason to be here at all yet are confident of their rights, turn out to be demanding and aggressive, never doubting the fact they shall remain unpunished, evade deportation and enjoy the assistance of both ‘humanitarian’ associations and the state itself.”^[27] 

The author condemns the role of the Catholic Church in both offering and soliciting ‘humanitarian’ aid for the migrants, and is clearly disgusted by the “complete traitor” Pope Francis who is condemned in the text for his “complete lack of historical knowledge,” “Trotskyist views,” and “rather delirious and insane conception of Christian charity.”^[28] Faye also presents the example of Jacques Attali, the economist and political advisor, as a demonstration of “impudent Jews” in action. He quotes Attali as writing the following for L’Express in June 2018:

The only solution is for us to understand, as soon as possible, that it is in our interest to massively develop this neighbouring continent [Africa] and help accelerate its demographic transition; to organise the coming of migrants to Europe; and to create the necessary conditions [on European soil] to welcome and integrate millions of people into our cultures upon their arrival from this cradle of humanity.^[29]

==In a chapter titled “The Omens of a Civil War,” Faye moves into an examination of instances in which low level ethnic conflict is already underway. This can be most clearly seen in the establishment of ethnic “no-go” zones in many European towns and cities, and their role as a hotbed for violence against police. Faye statistics for injuries suffered by French police in the course of deliberate ethnic ambushes and more general ethnic delinquency are sobering, running into the thousands every year. For Faye, these areas are not just “zones of lawlessness” but in fact “invaded areas” that have been successfully conquered by foreigners, and are essentially no longer part of France. 
Although the security services have been successful thus far in preventing significant acts of French retaliation, Faye points to the June 2018 arrest of ten men and women (“for the most part family men, with no criminal history”) for planning attacks on mosques as an example of the fact “tensions are indeed on the rise, as the country gradually turns into a powder keg.” In the author’s estimation, if such attacks were indeed to be carried out, “it would unleash a civil war upon us once and for all.”^[30]

==The book’s third chapter, “The Ethnocidal Project Targeting European Peoples,” examines in more detail how life in White countries is being fundamentally changed for the worse. 

Faye defines ethnocide as “the destruction of a people through non-sanguinary, long-term and more pervasive processes, namely progressive immigration flooding; the destruction of one’s cultural identity and historical memory; repressive measures; spoliation; and, last but not least, the relegation the indigenous population to a lower status.”^[31] 

Western governments are complicit in the ethnocide of their native peoples by refusing to act even in the fact of “incessant neighbourhood riots,” “ritualistic and mass-scale car arsons,” “occasionally deadly attacks and ambushes targeting policemen, gendarmes, and firefighters,” “verbal or physical assaults committed against native French people,” “the violent harassment of White women in the streets,” “acts of aggression perpetrated against doctors,” schools falling “into the grip of daily violence,” and “the open and raucous appropriation of public spaces, followed by that of entire towns.”^[32] 
Faye asserts that the state and associated elites are complicit in the ethnocide of the European peoples because they desire to create a “new man” (“a necessarily anti-racist and mixed-race type of man”), and describes the figures behind this effort as “cosmopolitan elites” and “collaborationist court Jews.”^[33] Macron is specifically denounced as a Kalergi-praising product of “globalist support and Jewish funding.”^[34]

In predicting the battle lines of the future civil war, Faye asserts that the primary aggressors in Europe will be Muslims, with the main Muslim organisations coming to direct the activities of ethnic rioters throughout France. In the early stages, this camp will be assisted by collaborators in the form of leftist “journalists, officials or politicians at all national and local levels,”^[35] before support and financial aid is further provided by Morocco, Algeria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and other countries “engaged in the Islamisation and colonisation of France.” 
 Against this coalition, Faye posits that a substantial element of the police and gendarmerie will move into a retaliatory mode, joining “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.” 
After initial skirmishes, Faye asserts that a specific response to collaborationist efforts would be required and, in his discussion of “the origin of pro-migrant and anti-French elites,” Faye doesn’t shy away from explaining that Jews are a prominent collaborationist element in French society:

It must also be said that in both rightists and leftist parties, though admittedly far more often in the leftist spectrum, one encounters Jewish MPs, ministers, general councillors and mayors who, for the most part, define themselves as ‘citizens of the world’ or quite simply Jewish rather than French. This is a rather unpleasant fact, since the nation they are supposed to love and serve with a patriotic heart is actually our own … As soon as the fate of Israel becomes more important than that of France in the words of the journalists, thinkers and politicians that are supposed to represent and faded our country, the result is a serious conflict of interest, one that I cannot fail to highlight.

==The book’s fourth chapter, “Foreign Occupation,” is an extended indictment of multiculturalism from the point of daily, widespread ethnic delinquency. Faye rails eloquently against the “vindictive” state of mind of “the young Afro-Muslim population,”^[36] who comprise “entire groups of seasoned and trained juvenile delinquents that fear neither the police — whose members are highly demotivated, discouraged and spiritless — nor a lax justice system that finds itself unable to keep pace with them.” 

We learn that in France “90% of all minors and young adults involved in all conceivable forms of criminality stem from Afro-Arab immigration.”^[37] The young delinquents organise in a “primitive tribal pattern,” and “shall form the shock battalions of an already brewing racial civil war.”  
The majority of the White victims of these urban occupying tribes are young women, provoking Faye to remark “In all cultures, the normal, vital reflex is to protect one’s women against any and all sexual assaults committed by foreigners. This, however, is not what we are witnessing in today’s Western Europe, whose members have now surrendered to complete mental weakness — it would indeed be racist and entirely reprehensible for us to ensure our women’s protection.”^[38] 

Faye rejects this weakness. For him, the matter is simple: any idea of a peaceful, multicultural living together with these groups is an irrational sham. “The only programme that one could envisage in their case is one where they would all travel back across the Mediterranean, regardless of any eggs broken along the way. A convivial living-together is only possible when it involves populations that are biologically and culturally related. Anything else is but a sham. We do not wish to live with these people. Period.”^[39]
 
==The next two chapters focus specifically on the Islamic nature of the mass migration into Europe, and the Islamisation process as a whole. 
In Faye’s view, “Islam shall act as the sole banner, the sole emblem for the rallying, mobilisation and identification of non-European populations. It shall embody what some fight for and others against, even if — and because — what lies under its din and behind its blazing shadow is a haunting biologico-racial melody.”^[40] 

Faye clearly despises Islam, calling it “the poorest and the most mediocre of all human religions,” and jihad little more than a “form of delinquency.”^[41] 
He highlights the existence of an “Islamosphere” occupied not just by the Muslims themselves but by “French people who have chosen the path of collaboration.” 
These are leftists who “spread the idea that Muslims embody the new image of the oppressed,”^[42] and work in concert with Muslim, Black, and Jewish lobbying groups to “intimidate French people and discourage any and all French criticism and resistance against immigration invasion and Islamisation.”^[43] 
Such collaborators, including the Jews Edgar Morin and Emmanuel Todd, whom Faye briefly profiles, are “driven by a fierce hatred of France, its culture, its traditions, its deep-rooted provincial population, its ethnic people and ‘little white folk,’ described as a bunch of racist hicks,” and have “infiltrated our associations, our national education system (a very serious development indeed) and the media.” 
Although many of the immigrants are anti-Jewish, presenting something of a paradox, Faye reminds us that these Jewish activists have not “joined the pro-immigrational cause from rational reflection, but due to an emotional and irrational surge of hatred for their native France.”^[44] 
He continues, referring also to irrational support for Islamisation from feminists and the broader Left:

What particularly fascinates these dumbstruck Islamo-leftists, these defrocked Trotskyists, these intellectuals nursed in the lap of cultural Marxism, these old communists or crypto-communists that still hold Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin in high regard and venerate Mao, Pol Pot, the violence of the Reign of Terror (1792-1793), the Paris Commune of 1871 and the crimes committed by the Spanish Republicans, is something consubstantial with Islam, something that they have in common with the latter and that is the focus of their deference and adoration — the tropism of fanatical violence and totalitarianism, which remain correlated and inseparable. That is what they have been missing since the disappearance of ‘genuine’ communism! And what Islam is now offering them is a similar dish, served bloody and on a silver platter.^[45]

==In chapter 7, “As the Catholics Lose their Footing,” Faye takes aim at Pope Francis and institutional Catholicism which has acted as “the ferocious enemy of the ethnic identity of white Europe and the objective accomplice of the migrational invasion conducted under the banner of Islam.”^[46] 
Pope Francis is described as “both a traitor and a madman.”^[47] Particularly concerning is the existence of large numbers of otherwise right-wing and traditionalist Catholics who nevertheless waver on matters of race. For Faye, this is an unforgivable positions that threatens to place such Catholics (“prisoners of their own intellectualism and of an annoying sort of biological relativism”) in an impossible situation in the eventual civil war. Faye explains:

It is all quite simply, actually: ask any patriotic Catholic if an African who also happens to be a patriot and has recently converted to Christianity should be sent home in the event of a mass de-migration process that would follow our side’s lightning-like assumption of power. You will see how long they hesitate before giving you an answer. There we have it! No, seriously now, hesitations of this order are no longer acceptable. We have no time to waste on such childishness. Foreigners are DIFFERENT FROM US and must return to their homeland as soon as possible.^[48]

The only dogma of concern to Faye is the simple fact that “in order to win a racial civil war, one must first be racist, regardless of whether one participate in it willingly or reluctantly … A racial AND civil war will involve violence, as well as terrible tragedy and injustice … An indigenous person must, however, choose other natives over all foreigners, rather than prefer some allogeneic ‘brothers in Christ.’ In their desire to soften the hearts of the French people fighting them, many immigrants will attempt to play this card.”^[49]

==The book’s eighth chapter, “The Jews Amidst the Racial War,” is the one I am most ambivalent about, and perhaps the weakest in an otherwise outstanding volume. To begin with, it is one of the shortest chapters, and one senses that Faye was uneasy or uncomfortable tackling the subject “head on,” rather than in the asides and minor profiles he scattered throughout the book. The basic problem, as I see it, is that while Faye was rightly scathing of those who are so anti-Jewish (in a distorted fashion) that they see Muslims as their allies (he names Alain Soral as an example), he failed to see that he had actually fallen into the mirror image of that problem, despising Muslims with such tunnel vision that he came to see, and search for, Jews as allies — despite all the evidence of Jewish collaborationist activities that he himself would amass and discuss. This isn’t to say that Faye doesn’t hit some high notes in this chapter. He remarks that “the Jewish soul finds itself continuously torn between exacerbated particularism and a universalistic sort of tendency; between its ghettoised spirit and its conquering mindset.”^[50] He rightly concludes that “this results in a number of contradictory features: their seeking of peace and security while relishing the idea of being persecuted; their aspiration to dominate and proud acknowledgement of their intrinsic superiority, alongside their embracement of the image of a small people that is perpetually under threat.”^[51] But, showing remarkable ignorance of Jewish opinion polls and voting patterns that suggest overwhelming political affinities among Jews as a whole, he believes, foolishly in my opinion, that these Jews, “Court Jews,” can be quarantined from the rest of the Jewish population who are potential allies.
As for any idea that a Jewish Question exists:

There is, however, a serious analytical mistake made by numerous anti-Semitic writers, especially Kevin B. MacDonald — that of focusing on the psychological traits of Jewish intellectual movements that are in favour of cosmopolitanism, and of confusing these traits with the behavioural and mental patterns of the Jewish ethnicity … A growing proportion of ‘common Jews’ are now rejecting both anti-racism and cosmopolitanism, partly in response to the Muslim-Arab invasion.^[52]

But Faye’s retort to MacDonald can only be regarded as, at best, anecdotal, and is flatly contradicted by, for example, my own analysis of Jewish representation in contemporary refugee and migrant organisations. MacDonald’s theory is also not of “the psychological traits of Jewish intellectual movements” (can intellectual movements have psychological traits?) but that a group evolutionary strategy in which the behavioural and mental patterns of the Jewish ethnicity can be observed in such movements. It’s clear that Faye was confused, and I suggest that his tunnel vision on the Muslim Question was the reason why. We might further consider his comment in the appendices of the book:

Judeocentrism [belief that a Jewish Question exists] is a hollow obsession whose causes, meaning and goals cannot be clearly defined. There are some who will claim that the reason I say this lies in my fear of the Jewish lobby, but I am not afraid of anything and am going to die soon. Over the years I have come to understand that the anti-Semitic reduction of all our current problems to the Jewish question is the most striking form of contemporary conspiracy theories.^[53]

And so, rather than reduce all of our current problems to the Jewish question (when has anyone on this site neglected to refer to Muslims, Blacks, or broader social decay including the failings of our own people?), Faye decided to reduce all of our current problems to the Muslim question. I must be clear in that I firmly believe that Faye is not guilty here of subversion or fear of the Jewish lobby. If I did, I would hesitate to recommend this book. Instead I see a paralysis-like error in thinking, brought about by a quite understandable reaction to the stark and visible Islamisation of France. This error (commonplace in countries with large and growing Muslim populations) comprises a small element of this excellent book, a few pages in a text more than 200 pages in length, and is in many places in the text quite contradicted by the “Judeocentric” material Faye himself cannot help but refer to. But I would neglect my duty as a reviewer for this website if I did not make it clear that one must have to flexibility of mind to be aware of all facets of the existing problem, and to avoid Faye’s potentially dangerous habit of seeing allies where they simply do not exist.

==But this is a book about racial civil war, not the Jewish Question, and in the final three chapters Faye returns to this theme with a vengeance, producing some of the best content of the volume. In “Our Law Enforcement Organisations Are at the End of Their Rope,” the author explains that French police are already at the frontline of the earliest phases of the racial civil war. He relates a number of infuriating anecdotes, including that of a police officer disciplined and demonised for shooting an African in the leg to avoid being beaten to death by a 15-strong African gang, but particularly horrifying is the brutal June 2016 murder of a police couple, slaughtered by Arabs in their own home, in front of their child. Brushed under the carpet by the media and authorities, Faye sees the incident as a “barbaric assassination” that “takes on the symbolic meaning of a declaration of war, one that is obviously both ethnic and racist in nature.”^[54] 
Due to the refusal of the establishment to act in a rational manner against racial criminals, French police are resigning in large numbers, with almost 3,000 quitting the police force in 2017. Faye argues they “might end up joining a potential Popular Resistance in the coming civil war against the Occupation and its collaborators.”^[55] The rest, he asserts, “will have no difficulty in choosing sides.”^[56]
==Chapter ten, “Race and Racism — At the Heart of the Coming Clashes,” concerns the total destruction of White lives under multiculturalism. Faye explains:

Maliciously targeted by Le Monde, Liberation, Mediapart, Telerama, and France Culture, these ‘petty Whites,’ i.e. our people and indigenous lower classes, have been forced to embrace ethnic coexistence, an artificial living-together that our leaders themselves do not even practice. This fool’s bargain also implies a blatant disregard for democracy at the hands of this shitty republic’s governments — a republic that has, since 1974, been resorting to decrees to impose an immigration invasion upon the French people, going against the latter’s wishes and corrupting their dreams of tranquility.^[57]

Whites are saturated with the ideology of anti-racism which “is completely contradictory as a result of its bias and tendency to overvalue ‘coloured people’ to the detriment of Whites” thereby contributing to “the profound racialisation of our society” and proving an “aggravating factor in an ethnic civil war characterised by its racial and racist dimensions.”^[58]  The increasing obviousness of racial antagonism in our societies is masked only via the efforts of Marxists in academia, government, and media who produce a steady stream of propaganda

for the sole purpose of intellectualising, blurring and thus rendering unsolvable the daily problems experienced by our French natives, who are forced to live among non-Whites … Our rulers impose immigration upon each and every one of us, as sociologists, psychologists, philosophers and other accomplices are seen on television in their fancy clothes and lovely little brown-nose glasses, telling us that it is all actually a blessing. The process of ethnic replacement is underway, but all is well, no problemo.^[59]

==In the eleventh and final chapter, “How the War Shall Unfold — Possibilities and Predictions,” Faye uses the material discussed thus far to build a model of how a racial civil war will begin and proceed in France, and other nations in Europe. This is a thought-provoking and sobering piece of work. A brief summary here would inevitably do an injustice to Faye’s well-developed sequence of thought, but Faye certainly sees the origin of a future conflict in police confrontations, either involving Muslims claiming police brutality in response to their heightened delinquency or “following the death of some Black African scum.”^[60] Rioting is viewed by Faye as having every potential to bleed into sustained guerrilla warfare and, if it were to be prolonged long enough, Faye sees the potential for Antifa (“leftist-anarchist troublemaker groups”) to join forces against the police. The alliance will be short-lived since collaborators in the race war, even if the ethnic faction wins, will “not be given the position they hope for in this future society. Instead, what awaits them is death, humiliation, beatings and a state of modern slavery.”^[61]

Faced with an escalation of violence, including massive Islamic terrorist attacks funded and supported by Muslim countries, the only hope for Europe is that such events cause a shock “strong and traumatic enough to reverse mentalities.”^[62] In fact, Faye argues that this is the primary condition for possible victory, without which we are fated to slow replacement and ultimate defeat. He stresses the same precondition for the United States, which he warns will endure “severe turmoil, perhaps even partitions, in the course of the next century.”^[63]

Faye reflects for some time on the possibility that we would suffer defeat, and ponders what would become of the European peoples in the eventuality. I don’t want to linger on that here, though I encourage all those reading this review to read the book and let this particular section urge them on to renewed efforts for our cause. Instead, here, I want to focus on his more optimistic conclusion, “The De-Migration of the Afterwar.” Here the author offers a vision of White victory. He posits that the racial civil war would “through its unique violence, turn into an unprecedented collective trauma whose memory will echo across the centuries.”^[64] 
In other words, multiculturalism would never again be repeated by our descendants. There would be a “massive repatriation of African and oriental populations to their countries of origin … It must be made possible, and must take place and commence very soon, because it is both necessary and vital … Let me state things clearly: whether willingly or by force, they shall indeed leave. This is not only my promise, but also my prognosis.”^[65]
Despite his error on the Jewish Question earlier in the book, I leave the last words of this review to Guillaume Faye, who returns to the theme, despite himself and with wisdom, to close his magnificent book – a book I recommend to all readers of this site, and to whoever may encounter this review elsewhere:

These anti-racist and anti-White leftist Jews will have to watch their backs when the wind turns … They will have to consider the option of returning to the land of their ancestors once the just anger of European identitarians allows the latter to cleanse not only France, but also every other part of the West. This is not a threat, but a piece of advice.

---

^[1] Faye, Ethnic Apocalypse, (hereafter EA) 7.
^[2] EA, viii.
^[3] EA, xi.
^[4] EA, xii.
^[5] EA, 1.
^[6] Ibid.
^[7] EA, 2.
^[8] EA, 2.
^[9] Ibid.
^[10] EA, 3.
^[11] Ibid.
^[12] Ibid.
^[13] EA, 88.
^[14] EA, 213.
^[15] EA, 6.
^[16] EA, 7.
^[17] EA, 9.
^[18] EA, 10.
^[19] EA, 12.
^[20] EA, 13.
^[21] EA, 15.
^[22] EA, 16.
^[23] EA, 17.
^[24] Ibid.
^[25] EA, 20.
^[26] Ibid.
^[27] EA, 21.
^[28] EA, 24.
^[29] EA, 29.
^[30] EA, 44.
^[31] EA, 49.
^[32] EA, 52.
^[33] EA, 56.
^[34] EA, 62.
^[35] EA, 57.
^[36] EA, 77.
^[37] EA, 79.
^[38] EA, 87.
^[39] EA, 89.
^[40] EA, 93.
^[41] EA, 94-5.
^[42] EA, 107.
^[43] EA, 112.
^[44] EA, 116.
^[45] EA, 134.
^[46] EA, 135.
^[47] EA, 143.
^[48] EA, 145.
^[49] EA, 146.
^[50] EA, 154.
^[51] Ibid.
^[52] EA, 155.
^[53] EA, 215.
^[54] EA, 164.
^[55] EA, 165.
^[56] EA, 166.
^[57] EA, 176.
^[58] EA, 178.
^[59] EA, 183.
^[60] EA, 189.
^[61] EA, 192.
^[62] EA, 207.
^[63] EA, 202.
^[64] EA, 209.
^[65] Ibid.
===============