Citater: Fascister i fåreklæder

Engelske oversættelser: Fascister i fåreklæder?

Dette er de engelske oversættelser, som er blevet oversat til dansk i bogen Fascister i Fåreklæder? I parentesen angives citatets placering i bogen.


”In certain instances, suicide seems to grant a sort of ennobling grace in the sense that a voluntary death is charged with meaning in a way that a natural or accidental death is not”. (s. 18)

“A Lenin was needed to extract a clear body of doctrine and to transform this enormous hotchpotch into an effective weapon of political war”. (s. 25)

“It is always possible to act, it is less easy to succeed. This is even more so in a revolutionary struggle, a fight to the death against an all-powerful, cunning, and experienced enemy, which one must fight more by ideas and shrewdness than by force” (s. 25)

”I loved the electric atmosphere of the demonstrations, the movements of the crowd, the way in which slogans and cries spread, the confrontations with the police, the smell of teargas”. (s. 26)

“Already on the international level the major contradiction is no longer between Right and Left, liberalism and socialism, fascism and communism, ‘totalitarianism’ and ‘democracy’. It is between those who want the world to be one-dimensional and those who support a plural world grounded in the diversity of cultures”. (s. 30)

“If our communitarians really want to defend the cause des peuples, they might start with Europeans, who are now under assault by the demographic, migratory, and cultural forces of an overpopulated Third World. In face of such threats, you won’t find me snivelling like a priest or fleeing like an intellectual to the ‘Other’s’ cause: ‘Ourselves alone’ will suffice”. (s. 35-36)

”And let us add that the small Arab shopkeeper contributes more to maintain, in a convivial way, the French identity than the Americanomorphic park of attractions or the ”shopping center” of a very French capital”. (s. 36)

“Everywhere in the West there prevails the unfounded belief that there’s a difference between Islam and ‘Islamism,’ and that a Western, secularized, that is, moderate, Islam is possible. There’s no such thing. Every Muslim is potentially a jihadist”. (s. 37)

“As an ethnic group, a people can superficially adopt the civilisation of another group, but it can never be integrated into the culture, since the latter ultimately rests on a hereditary or biological disposition (…) Culture is the basis of civilisations, but culture also rests on a people’s genetic capacity – that is, on its bio-anthropological substrata, its germen”. (s. 38)

“More than ‘immigration’, we need to speak of mass colonisation by African, Islam is seeking to conquer is the first step toward ethnic civil war; that the invasion is as much about maternity wards as it is about porous borders; that, for demographic reasons, Islamic power is threatening to install itself in France, first at the municipal, then, perhaps, at the national level. (s. 38)

“For the cultural transmission of a tradition and the continuation of a civilisation are impossible without maintaining its biological core, its original stock (…) If a culture is lost, recovery is possible. When the biological germen is destroyed, nothing is possible”. (s. 38)

“Man is a territorial animal – one who defends his land or conquers another (…) Competition, or the struggle for life, constitutes the principal motor force of evolution in everything from bacteria to humans, as well as history (…) The enemy is never wrong, if he wins. A ‘superior people’, a ‘superior individual’, a ‘superior group’ (whether military, economic, religious, etc.) operates not with abstract, ontological principles, but on the basis of the concrete results that come from competition. This is the case for all living things. One is never ‘intrinsically superior’ to others. One is superior only in successfully achieving supremacy. It’s the law of the strongest, the most capable, the most flexible that always dominates. Vae Victis, death to the vanquished, such is the law of life; there has never been born a philosopher who could prove otherwise”.  (s. 39)

”Real spirituality, though, is possible only in combat (…) As Sartre (who rarely understood the measure of his words) once naively observed, it is in adversity, in the urgency of battle and war, that joy is born” (s. 39)

“On the other hand, as foretold by philosopher Raymond Ruyer – someone hated by Leftist intellectuals – in his seminal works Les nuisances idéologiques and Les cents prochains siècles, when the historical period of the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries will have come to a close, and its egalitarian hallucinations will have been sunk by catastrophe, humanity will revert to its archaic values, which are purely biological and human (i.e. Anthropological): the separation of gender roles; the transmission of ethnic and folk traditions, spirituality and priestly organisation; visible and structuring social hierarchies; the worship of ancestors; rites and tests of initiation; the re-establishment of organic communities (from family to the folk); the de-individualisation of marriage (unions must be the concern of the whole community and not merely of the married couple); and end of the confusion between eroticism and conjugality; the prestige of the warrior caste; inequality among social statuses (…)”. (s. 39)

“Mental AIDS is an infection of a psychological nature that affects virtually all the ‘elites’ – the political class, the media class, show business, the ‘cultural’ community, ‘artists’, filmmakers – inclining them to oppose the interests of their own people (…)” (s. 40)

“With biological AIDS, T4 lymphocytes, which are supposed to defend the organism, fail to react to the HIV virus as a threat, and instead treat it as a ‘friend’, helping it in this way to reproduce. The same holds true for mental AIDS (…) Mental AIDS confuses, in effect, the enemy with the friend”. (s. 40)

”To speak colloquially, men have become pussies” (s. 41)

“I am willing to bet that the year 2050 will resemble the year 500 much more than anything we believe we have been promised”. (s. 42)

“How can we not rejoice, however, at the end of a world that is detestable on the ethical level and eroded by its own contempt for life? (…) The end of the world is good news, even if it will occur soon with distress and suffering (…) The future is thrilling because it is catastrophic”. (s. 42)

“The society we know can’t be fixed, the system can’t be saved. This is the illusion of every conservative tendency. The sole solution to the present situation will come from chaos – from civil war, economic depression, etc. – that overthrows established mentalities and makes acceptable and indispensable that which was previously unimaginable. Only in situations of chaos are the given variables changed and does it become possible to establish another order – the post-chaos. Only in crisis, then, will a solution be found. To construct a new home, it’s first necessary that the old one collapses. It’s not a pessimist but a realist who sees this (…) It’s only when their backs are against the wall, faced with an unavoidable emergency, that people find solutions that in other times are unthinkable”. (s. 42)

“We are standing face to face with the barbarians. The enemy is no longer outside but inside the City and the ruling ideology, paralysed, is incapable of spotting him (…) By contrast, the situation our forces find themselves in with respect to the system is similar to that which existed in the 1930s: no point of agreement is possible (except on the part of the potential traitors of the parliamentary Right, which form a rather significant portion of the ruling class): the only strategy is all-out war. In adopting a revolutionary stance, aimed at the overthrowing of a civilisation, we must be ready to face total war – a fight without quarter”. (s. 43)

”Europeans need to form a land army, made up of native Europeans and adequate to fighting a possible religious-ethnic civil war (…) Fifth imperative: in the long term, the birth of a revolutionary European-identitarian party is indispensable. It needs to be prepared” (s. 43)

“The three pillars of an ideology and project of European unity are (1) awakening an ethnic consciousness that makes defending our common biological heritage, our race, the top priority; (2) the regeneration of ancestral values, the forgetting of which is the main cause of today’s tragedies; and (3) the creative assertion of an all-inclusive and revolutionary European political doctrine”.  (s. 43)

“It is a matter of being ready and powerful for that day when the hurricane comes, the hurricane which is our only chance, our only lever to move the world”.

“We have to prepare ourselves for the coming tempest, to harden ourselves – for the sake of attacking, like a cobra, quickly and decisively, once the moment of opportunity strikes. In anticipating this moment, we need now to start arming ourselves – mentally and physically – we need to recruit, to proselytise, to educate, to organise in networks of solidarity and action”. (s. 44)

“But something even more serious happened: because of the traumas they experienced and the radical changes in their outlook, all the descendants of the great waves of extra-European immigration that had hit western Europe, in particular since the 1960s, were unfortunately… well, deported. We are talking here of several tens of millions of people. You can well imagine how this operation carried out by the ”European Liberation Army” was no gentle business… This is what the historians call the ”Reconquista” (…) there were no massacres. These rootless people without a homeland were transferred en masse from Europe to the island of Madagascar by boat. There were 23 million of them. Many were legally ‘French’, ‘Belgian’, ‘Dutch’ and ‘British’. But this meant nothing now. The nationality rights of the old world had completely disappeared… Archaic criteria had come to prevail”. (s. 44-45)

”All the principles of the old society are gone, and we’ve reverted to the archaic, natural laws, with a disconcerting ease” (s. 46)

”If the generation of native Europeans which turns 20 between 2000 and 2010 doesn’t act, everything will be lost – forever – as the spirit of those who built the great cathedrals is finally extinguished” (s. 52)

The war and collapse of the old order allowed nihilism – that had been present since the Enlightenment, but remained hidden behind the conservative backdrop – to step forward. Only a man with true conservative convictions, who saw through both the illusions of progress and the frailties of the old system, could counter this form of nihilism. What characterized this type was a special mentality that could only be expressed in paradoxes (…) The adherents of the Conservative Revolution differed from the older conservatism on the assumption that the bonds, in which the conservative man wanted to live, were yet to be created”. (s. 145)

“These ideals transcend the political sphere; yet, when translated on the political level, the necessarily lead to qualitative differences – which is to say: to hierarchy, authority and imperium in the broader sense of the word’ as opposed to ‘all forms of democratic and egalitarian turmoil’”. (s. 154)

”The phrase is a Far Eastern saying, expressing the idea that if one succeeds in riding a tiger, not only does one avoid having it leap on one, but if one can keep one’s seat and not fall off, one may eventually get the better of it”. (s. 156)

“When a cycle of civilization is reaching its end, it is difficult to achieve anything by resisting it and by directly opposing the forces in motion. The current is too strong; one would be overwhelmed. The essential thing is not to let oneself be impressed by the omnipotence and apparent triumph of the forces of the epoch. These forces, devoid of connection with any higher principle, are in fact on a short chain. One should not become fixated on the present and on things at hand, but keep in view the conditions that may come about in the future. Thus the principle to fol1ow could be that of letting the forces and processes of this epoch take their own course, while keeping oneself firm and ready to intervene when “the tiger, which cannot leap the person riding it, is tired running”. (s. 157)

”Thus, modernity has given birth to the most empty civilisation mankind has ever known” (s. 161)

”For those who share Nietzsche’s belief that the conversion of Europe to Christianity and the more or less complete integration of the European mind into the Christian mentality, was one of the most catastophic events in world history – a catastophe in the proper sense of the word – just what can the word ”paganism” mean today?”  (s. 162)

“When it comes to specifying the values particular to paganism, people have generally listed features such as these: an eminently aristocratic conception of the human individual; an ethics founded on honor (”shame” rather than ”sin”); an heroic attitude towards life’s challenges; the exaltation and sacralization of the world, beauty, the body, strength, health; the rejection of any ”worlds beyond”; the inseparability of morality and aesthetics; and so on. From this perspective the highest value is undoubtedly not a form of ”justice” whose purpose is essentially interpreted as flattening the social order in the name of equality, but everything that can allow a man to surpass himself. For paganism, it is pure absurdity to consider the results of the workings of life’s basic framework as unjust. In the pagan ethic of honor, the classic antitheses noble vs. base, courageous vs. cowardly, honorable vs. dishonorable, beautiful vs. deformed, sick vs. healthy, and so forth, replace the antitheses operative in a morality based on the concept of sin: good vs. evil, humble vs. vainglorious, submissive vs. proud, weak vs. arrogant, modest vs. boastful, and so on”. (s. 164-165)

”Generation Identity is a fighting community in the service of our national identity (…) A fighting community because, for us, life is a struggle” (s. 165)

“Theoretically, hierarchy is rejected, but in practice it’s accepted, since no society can do without it and since it’s inscribed in the genetic memory” (s. 165)

“Egalitarianism is an institutionalised lie. It’s the most humble, paradoxically, who are hurt the most by its imposture, since everywhere the right of excellence is denied and everywhere mediocrities and scoundrels are favoured (…) As Spencer and Darwin have shown, the human race is bound like every other animal species to the central fact of existence: inequality”. (s. 165-166)

“The caste system is one of the main expressions of the traditional sociopolitical order, a ”form” victorious over chaos and the embodiment of the metaphysical ideas of stability and justice. The division of individuals into castes or into equivalent groups according to their nature and to the different rank of activities they exercise with regard to pure spirituality is found with the same traits in all higher forms of traditional civilizations, and it constitutes the essence of the primordial legislation and of the social order according to ”justice””. (s. 166)

”Confronted by Islam’s conquering virility, the European feels morally disarmed and confused” (s. 168)

“DECADENCE: The weakening of a people or civilisation resulting from internal causes that leads it to lose its identity and creativity. The causes of decadence are usually the same throughout history: excessive individualism and hedonism, the softening of mores, social egoism, devirilisation, contempt for heroic values, the intellectualisation of elites, the decline of popular education, the abandonment of or turning away from spirituality and the sacred, etc”.  (s. 169)

“I quite agree that societies perish because they are degenerate, and for no other reason. This is the evil condition that makes them wholly unable to withstand the shock of the disasters that close in upon them (…) If it perish, it is because it has no longer the same vigor as it had of old in battling with the dangers of life; in a word, because it is degenerate (…) The word degenerate, when applied to a people, means (…) that the people has no longer the same intrinsic value as it had before, because it has no longer the same blood in its veins, continual adulterations having gradually affected the quality of that blood. (s. 170)

“This phenomenon leads everywhere … to the fact that socially inferior human material is enabled … to penetrate and finally to annihilate the healthy nation. The selection for toughness, heroism, social utility … must be accomplished by some human institution if mankind, in default of selective factors, is not to be ruined by domestication-induced degeneracy. The racial idea as the basis of our state has already accomplished much in this respect. The most effective race-preserving measure is … the greatest support of the natural defences … We must – and should – rely on the healthy feelings of our Best and charge them with the selection which will determine the prosperity or the decay of our people … [that is, charge them with] the extermination of elements of the population loaded with dregs. Otherwise, these deleterious mutations will permeate the body of the people like the cells of a cancer”.  (s. 172)

“Behind all this we find the implicit, suicidal, and ethnomasochistic idea that I have often mentioned in other writings: the main goal of gender theory is to promote homosexuality (to White people, mainly) and, by extension, sterility, as well as to downgrade the status of the idea of the reproducing couple. Beyond the work of homosexual and feminist lobbies, one always finds the implied imperative: Whites must not reproduce. Please become homosexual and sterile!”. (s. 174)

”The Renaissance of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries was precisely that: a rebirth (…) This rebirth was no journey backward or a simple resurgence of the ”past,” but on the contrary the point of departure for a new spiritual adventure (…)” (s. 176)

“In fact, it is not a question of going back to the past, but of connecting with it – and also, by that very fact, in a spherical conception of history, to connect to the eternal and cause it to surge back, to have consonance in life, and to disentangle itself from the tyranny of the logos, the terrible tyranny of the Law, so to establish the school of the mythos and life (…)  In the same way it is a question of referring to the ”memory” of paganism not in a chronological way, so as to return to an “earlier time,” but in a mythological way, to seek for that which, through time, surpasses time and still speaks to us today. It is a question of connecting to something that cannot be surpassed rather than to something that has been ”surpassed” (…) In the pagan perspective the past is always future”.  (s. 176)

“Let us imagine a sphere, a billiard ball moving in disorderly fashion across a surface, or moved by the (necessarily imperfect) will of a player: after a number of spins, the same point on the surface of the ball will inevitably touch the cloth. This is the ‘eternal return of the identical’, but not of the ‘same’. For the sphere is moving and even if that very ‘same’ point is touching the cloth, its position is not the same as before. The same image can be applied to the succession of the seasons and the historical outlook of Archeofuturism: the return to archaic values should not be understood as a cyclical return to the past (a past that has failed, as it has engendered the catastrophe of modernity), but rather as the re-emergence of archaic social configurations in a new context. In other terms, this means applying age-old solutions to completely new problems; it means the reappearance of a forgotten and transfigured order in a different historical context. (s. 177)

“Facing an adversary who advances into battle armed with a fully flourishing ideological corpus, the man of the right is decidedly helpless. Without precise theory, no effective action. We cannot create the economy without an idea. And above all, we cannot put the cart before the horse. All the great revolutions of history have only served to transpose into facts an evolution already realised, in an underlying way, in the spirit. We cannot have a Lenin without having had a Marx. This is the revenge of the theoreticians – who are only the great losers of history in appearance (…) The French right is ‘Leninist’ – without having read Lenin. It has not grasped the significance of Gramsci. It has not seen how cultural power threatens the apparatus of the state; how this ‘cultural power’ acts upon the implicit values around which the consensus indispensable to the duration of political power crystallises”.  (s. 185)

“It should also be said that one of the handicaps of the Nouvelle Droite has been a poor reading of Gramscism, based on the adoption of the ‘all is cultural, all is intellectual’ strategy. In our metapolitical ‘Gramscian’ strategy, we had simply overlooked the fact that the cultural battle Gramsci promoted was associated with the political and economic battle of the Italian Communist party, and as such did not take place ‘in the void’ (…) In order to prove effective, ideological and cultural action must be supported by concrete political forces which it integrates and extends”. (s. 187-188)

“We, nationalists, believe in no universal morality. We do not believe in any humanity as a collective being with a central conscience and a unitary justice. We believe instead that truth, justice, and morality are strongly conditioned by time, place, and blood. We believe in the value of the particular”. (s. 206)

”Thus, human life is necessarily rooted in a given context, prior to the way individuals and groups see the world, even critically, and to the way they formulate their aspirations and goals. They do not exist in the real world other than as concretely rooted people”. (s. 206-207)

“Diversity is inherent in the very movement of life, which flourishes as it becomes more complex. The plurality and variety of races, ethnic groups, languages, customs, even religions has characterised the development of humanity since the very beginning (…) The French New Right is profoundly opposed to the suppression of differences. It believes that a good system is one that transmits at least as much diversity as it has received. The true wealth of the world is first and foremost the diversity of its cultures and peoples (…) All cultures have their own ‘centre of gravity’ (Herder): different cultures provide different responses to essential questions. This is why all attempts to unify them end up destroying them”. (s. 207)

“Since the dawn of history, humankind has been composed of innumerable cultures, peoples and tribes. Each has developed its own way of life, and an entirely unique way of seeing the world (…) Preserving cultural diversity and ensuring the most peaceful possible coexistence has always been our generation’s great task. Deep in our hearts burns the desire to leave the era of hatred behind us. We want to visit other lands and peoples, get to know and love their unique characteristics, and avoid conflicts through better insight into the perspectives of other cultures”. (s. 208)

”Just as every person requires his own private place, every culture requires its own space in which to develop and structure everyday life according to its own manner”. (s. 209)

”Third Worldists argue that the countries of the North  have exploited the Third World, while the reverse is true (…) European colonialism (…) was harmful to Europe, though it benefited the Third World, whose demography it vastly developed”. (s. 226)

“Our ideal is Reconquest, and we will see it through to the end”. (s. 232)

”The biggest danger is the capture of White women by extra-European foreigners, or what might be called uterus theft”. (s. 282)

“Women want to be conquered. The longing for the one who can win them over and make them his lies deep in them. Instead of heroic knights, you send them ‘good friends’ and feeble cowards. Men want to win a woman who is worth the effort and the trials they must endure, for whom the leap through the fire and the battle with the dragon are worth it. Today, instead of the beautiful princess, only a scowling feminist or a jutting manjaw awaits the hero at the end. We’ve recognised the true nature of the sexes, and we want to live in harmony with it. We want to be real men and real women”. (s. 286-287)

”He who drives all cultures and peoples together into one territory will cause the bloodiest wars, in the long term”. (s. 318)

“Realistically, if tomorrow an ethnic conflict were to break out in France – which we want to avoid at all costs by pursuing the path of political engagement – obviously we would not sit around with our arms folded. We would protect our families. We reject violence but we will use force if necessary. And if the French have fallen asleep from consumerism and been rendered docile by the need to earn their living, nevertheless, they remain a warlike people who, having long endured numerous outrages without reacting, have always ended by throwing off their tyrants in a way that serves as a lesson to all who might be tempted to chain us again”. (s. 318)

“To the immigrant invaders and the lobbies of the culture war which has been declared upon us, we say this: enough submission, enough compromise. We are aware that we are committing ourselves to a battle to the death. Globalism will kill identity, or identity will kill globalism. there is no other possible outcome (…) It will soon be 1,300 years since  Charles Martel stopped the Arabs at Poitiers following a heroic battle which saved our country from Muslim invasion. It happened on 25 October 732. Today, we have reached 2012 and the choice is still the same: live free or die”. (s. 354)

“Struggle is at the origin of all things (…) I believe that … if a people wish to live they should develop a will to power, otherwise they vegetate, live miserably and become prey to a stronger people, in whom this will to power is developed to a higher degree”. (s. 366)

”War alone keys up all the energies of man to their greatest pitch and sets the mark of nobility on those nations which have the bravery to face it. All other tests are substitutes which never place a man face to face with himself before the alternative of life and death (…) A doctrine must therefore be a vital act and not a verbal display”.  (s. 366)

”The fatherland is not simply a territory, but a biological lineage, the place where one’s ancestors are buried” (s. 374-375)

“The city dies, the nation – without the vital lifeblood of new generations – can no longer resist – composed as it is by now of a corrupt and aged people – against a younger population that will require the abandonment of its frontiers. This has happened. It can happen again. It will happen and not only between city and nation, but on an infinitely larger magnitude: the entire white race, the Western race, can be submerged by the other races of colour that multiply with a rhythm unknown to ours. Are the Blacks and the Yellows at the door? Yes, they are at the door”. (s. 375)

“Europeans as such are themselves responsible for the ills afflicting them: the ills of the declining birth rate, Third World and Islamic colonisation, deculturation, American domination, strategic feeblemindedness, etc. They have, in effect, allowed their enemies to pollute their spirit and corrupt their body”. (s. 375)

”Europeans as such are themselves responsible for the ills afflicting them: the ills of the declining birth rate, Third World and Islamic colonisation, deculturation, American domination, strategic feeblemindedness, etc. They have, in effect, allowed their enemies to pollute their spirit and corrupt their body”. (s. 375)

”But I’ll admit I have displeased some in saying that immigration is a fact, no longer an option, and that in engaging a battle, one has to fight on its specific terrain, not on the one which we might prefer to fight (…) The comforting idea of a future Reconquista [in which Europeans will militarily recapture the lands now lost to Third World immigrants] is no longer entertained, except by a handful of spirits who haven’t a clue as to what world they’re living in”. (s. 432)

”GERMEN: a people’s or civilisation’s biological root – the core of ethnicity – upon which everything else rests”. (s. 432)

”The White population is being displaced, a sort of genocide is being carried out against it”. (s. 432)

”Ethnic civil war is the sole means of treating a problem ‘hotly’ that can never be resolved ‘coldly’, within the state’s system of law or through its democratic procedures. Make no mistake: I’m not calling for war, but I consider it inevitable, something almost automatic”. (s. 432)

”Only when on the brink of disaster – when economic hedonism will have come to an end – will the European peoples find the strength to react against what awaits them. No effective solutions can be expected prior to the unleashing of the catastrophe that will most likely take place. People’s power to resist has been sapped by consumerism , comfort, and the countless ‘commodities’ of the society of the spectacle (…) The cure can only be a radical and painful one. We are heading towards a revolution that will make the Russian one seem like a brawl in comparison” (s. 432)

“It is well known where and under what symbols the forces for a possible resistance tried to organise. On one side, a nation that, since it had been unified, had known nothing but the mediocre climate of liberalism, democracy, and a constitutional monarchy, dared to assume the symbol of Rome as the basis for a new political conception and a new ideal of virility and dignity. Analogous forces awoke in the nation that in the Middle Ages had made the Roman symbol of imperium its own in order to reaffirm the principle of authority and the primacy of those values that are rooted in the blood, race, and the deepest powers of a stock. And while in other European nations, groups were already orienting themselves in the same direction, a third force in Asia joined the ranks, the nation of the samurai, in which the adoption of the outer forms of modern civilisation had not prejudiced its fidelity to a warrior tradition centred upon the symbol of the solar empire of divine right”.  (s. 438)

“We need to prepare for the approaching chaos and start thinking in post-chaos terms”. (s. 438)

”Husserl proposed to study time through the use of music. The consciousness of hearing the music is not based on the strict identification of notes sounding in a concrete, discrete moment. Hearing music is something different from hearing an individual note that sounds now, in the present. The consciousness of music occurs by hearing an individual note that sounds now, in the present, as well as recalling the past notes that are dissolving little by little into  nothingness. However, their resonance persists in the consciousness and gives music its aesthetic sense. Husserl calls it ‘the continuous instance’. The past is present in the present. The present thus becomes continuous and includes the past as a vanishing presence. This is the methodological key for the understanding of history. History is awareness of the presence of the past in the present (…) the soul should recall the hidden past of its previous lives in order to reconstruct the wholeness of the melody of destiny. Only thus could it be played harmoniously”. (s. 439)

”When [GRECE-style] identitarians took up the cause des peuples in the early 1980s, it was in the name of ethnopluralism. This ’cause’, however, was little more than a rhetorical ruse to justify the right of European peoples to retain their identity in face of a world system that seeks to make everyone American. For in resisting the forces of deculturation, it was hoped that Europeans, like Third World peoples, would retain the right to their differences [la droit à la différence] — and do so without having to suffer the accusation of racism. As such, the slogan assumed that every people, even white people, possessed such a right. But no sooner was this argument made than the cosmopolitan P. A. Taguieff [a leading academic commentator on the far Right] began referring to it as a ‘differentialist racism’ [in which cultural difference, rather than skin color, became the criterion for exclusion]. In retrospect, the New Right’s strategy seems completely contrived, for la cause des peuples, la droit à la différence, and ‘ethnopluralism’ have all since been turned against identitarians. It is, moreover, irrelevant to Europe’s present situation, threatened, as it is, by a massive non-European invasion and by a conquering Islam, abetted by our ethnomaschoistic elites”. (s. 440)

“Race-mixing is fatal to a people’s heredity and the pursuit of its civilisation”.  (s. 447)

”GERMEN: A people’s or civilisation’s biological root — the core of ethnicity — upon which everything else rests (…) If a culture is lost, recovery is possible. When the biological germen is destroyed, nothing is possible”.  (s. 447)

Scroll til toppen