An Ineluctable Phenomenon?
Le Conservateur also wrote an article criticizing the news about the "rise" in French births. Here are a few passages:
In reality, these raw figures are hiding that which remains unsaid: the number of births of foreign origin and the number of births from non-French cultures. In terms of national cohesiveness and the survival of French culture, it is ethnic French births that we need; let us not put on the blinders. In truth, possessing a document from the French Republic is not enough to make you a person of French Culture. I remind everyone that France existed before the Republic and defines itself essentially by cultural rather than administrative criteria.
And what do we get? We see that the press in its ensemble hides the truth, maybe out of lack of information since this topic is a real TABOO in our so-called free society obsessed with transparency...The only real indicator - the degree to which one belongs to French culture - is not measurable. And yet it's the only standard that ought to be of interest to us...
To clarify my remarks, I remind you that the right to the respect and protection of one's culture is inscribed in the fundamental charters of the United Nations. When the Kanaks or the Peruvian Indians demand it, it is called a just struggle for emancipation. But when it's about "ethnic French", then it is nothing more or less than fascism or racism...We have an inalienable right to defend our culture, and no moral principle can deny it to us.
Le Conservateur was vindicated when François Héran, the director of INED (National Institute of Demographic Studies), announced on January 27 that if nothing changes, the French population will be replaced by a population of immigrants within 100 years:
The lies are being exposed, without anyone being disturbed by that, least of all the liars themselves: politicians, intellectuals and journalists...
Lie Nº 1 - There aren't so many immigrants as you think.
Mr. Héran's position is tactful - he limits himself to observing an imbalance...and calls on politicians to prepare public opinion for this population substitution:
"We cannot predict future immigration, but it will be greater than it is today. There will be more deaths and fewer births, because there will be fewer women of child-bearing age...Immigration, without anyone wanting it, will be the primary source of population growth..."
Lie Nº 2 - Mr. Sarkozy's selective immigration would be a solution.
Mr. Héran opposes the notion that "immigration could become secondary in the growth of the French population...through selectivity. That won't work, because family re-unification and asylum are still very important since they accompany immigration of labor, even if it is selective.
Lie Nº3 - Politicians are not blind and would not try to stifle the debate on immigration.
"The mixing of races is going to continue. It's not that I'm for it or against, it's an objective question: immigration will become the main motor of growth, so inevitably the mixing will proceed, and nothing will stop it. It's better to prepare for it rather than to deny reality..."
In conclusion, we can answer Mr. Héran when he speaks of the ineluctable nature of this phenomenon. It is up to us to save our heritage and our culture, without worrying about the moralists of so-called anti-racism who have been lying for decades, which is what Mr. Héran implies in his remarks. In addition, let's sweep away the preconceived notion that the population must not decrease. A few generations of demographic winters would be better than the cultural catastrophe that awaits us, no matter what MEDEF thinks...
This message is to the attention of the voters: "Those who have ears will hear."
Note: MEDEF (Movement of French Enterprises) refers to an organization of entrepreneurs and business leaders who advocate immigration as a solution to the labor shortage.
The photo of immigrants arriving at Ellis Island, New York is from Fotosearch. The photo is a memory of a very different type of immigration: limited, controlled and compatible with needs and values of America. This is why it worked so well. Most immigrants before the '60's flourished in America and made major contributions to society. Immigration was a privilege, not an entitlement.