The current phase of France’s immigrant insurgency — with riots in 300 cities and towns — will sputter out eventually. But any return to peace will be a false peace. France has been changed irrevocably. The internal enemy created by Gallic bigotry has been mobilized.
Desperate apologists for France’s apartheid system claim that the present uproar is merely about youthful anger, that Muslim fundamentalism isn’t in play. Just wait. Islamist extremists aren’t stupid. Thrilled by this spontaneous uprising, they’ll move to exploit the fervor of the young to serve their own ends.
Expect terror. Whether the current violence ebbs tonight or lasts for weeks to come, the uprising of the excluded and oppressed in the streets of France has only begun.
Meanwhile, every American who believes in racial equality and human dignity should sympathize with the rioters, not with the effete bigots on the Seine. ~Ralph Peters, theOneRepublic
Mr. Peters is a long-standing apologist for hegemony and its evils, and he is also one of the most fervent, bitter, nasty Francophobes of the last century. As such, he represents the marriage of the worst anti-American (as the term should truly be understood) instincts and some of the most bilious hatred floating around in supposedly “mainstream” writing today. He shows us, in pure form, the neocon Schadenfreude at seeing France implode thanks to immigration policies identical to those the neocons insist that we in America continue to endure. I suspect that the rioting Muslims in France today have more respect for the French than Mr. Peters, so anything he has to say about France would be worthless, except that it reveals the moral insanity of our own brand of “effete bigots.”
Peters is the author of New Glory, the latest in a long line of his idiotic, angry screeds (Publisher’s Weekly called it “lively but rarely incisive”) urging on the domination of the world and the defeat of France. His statements about the “oppression” of immigrants in France, contrasted with the boundless opportunity supposedly available to them here, are simply ideological. The underclass created by mass illegal immigration in this country is even more fully excluded from American society and more rigorously exploited than any Muslim in France. This is not to demonise America or vindicate France, as both are guilty of reckless, suicidal immigration policies that will have equally pernicious results, but it is to remember that we are on the same foolish course that the French have taken. Our country and population are larger, and our economy is slightly more dynamic, but the time will come when those advantages will be exhausted by the strains mass immigration is imposing on us.
What is different between here and there at the moment is that France’s immigrants are predominantly Muslim. They have been steeped not only in their intrinsically violent religion, which provides ready-made justification for any act of violence committed for the sake of “justice” or for the Islamic community and the Prophet, but also in a modern Muslim identity shaped by erstwhile resistance movements in the Near East. Heirs to a culture with no meaningful public political discourse, their instinctive response to grievance, real or imagined, is the street violence a la Palestine that they have valorised (and which the leftist buffoons in Europe have likewise valorised).
Gallic “bigotry” has not created this enemy, but it is assuredly an enemy of France and of the West. Perhaps if there had been sufficient prejudice, and an attendant instinct for self-preservation, on the part of Frenchmen in decades past, there would not now be a sizeable fraction of the population that is fundamentally alien and hostile to the rest of the country. Profoundly “racist” nations do not allow masses of foreigners into their countries–but they may become deeply prejudiced and hateful of those foreigners as a result of having let them in without considering what it would mean. It is the French indifference to their own heritage and the foolish welcome to unassimilable newcomers that have made such a conflict possible.