Hillary Clinton put it best when she tweeted “Victory for Macron, for France, the EU, & the world. Defeat to those interfering w/democracy. (But the media says I can’t talk about that).”
France voted for corrupt neo-liberal government aimed at unifying the world into a rootless trade bloc that tolerates the internal displacement of its own people by economic migrants, and one which skillfully uses the media to portray itself as the underdog fighting the massively satanic reactionary forces of hate, racism, and xenophobia. All people have a right to live in France on unemployment and conduct terrorist attacks on its soil against the natives. People who say otherwise are Hitler. The French could not muster more than 36% support at the most recent count for a candidate that was at least nominally opposed to mass immigration. The Americans at least landed almost 50% and won due to a quirk of the electoral system, even though their candidate ended up backpedaling on nativism.
France not so much.
In France, North African and Arab terrorists can kill over 200 people in less than two years and still have most of the country support the growth of the immigrant communities that produced them. “France for the French” was rejected by a majority of French voters, a majority of whom were presumably ethnically French, even though doing so will lead to a country where they are one day a minority.
But no matter. It is more important to be anti-racist and live with militarized police patrolling your cities than to live in a nice homogeneous high-trust society where there are no anti-social alienated immigrants who find their identity in pan-religious millenarian movements aimed at violently destroying the host country. That’s the real nightmare.
The media hyped up the idea of “new nationalism” as a fever sweeping across Europe, which they will now use to discredit nationalism even further as it suffered a crushing blow in France. This will probably work on the domesticated peoples of Britain, France, Germany, and elsewhere in Western Europe. And with its defeat, terror attacks and the ethnic disintegration of European nations will continue, and only serve to further the convictions of liberals and multiculturalists that they are winning the crusade against racism. Terrorist attacks show that Muslims aren’t being integrated enough, which means we need more Muslims and more state spending on accommodating them. That’s the only possible conclusion right?
But is there a silver lining to the terminal illness of French society, and that more broadly of Western Europe? Well, the more these countries deteriorate, the more appealing the nationalist Visegrad countries of Central and Eastern Europe will become. The increasing frequency and magnitude of attacks, the Babelization, and the general nastiness that will accompany politics in ethnically-torn countries will not only make the case for nationalism stronger as an ideology, but bolster its popularity where it is already entrenched.
There is also the possibility that those nationalists most aghast at the destruction of Western Europe will leave, taking their capital and human capital with them to, well, Whiter pastures. These people will be of great benefit to places like Poland, Hungary or the Baltics especially, where fertility is not much better than in Western Europe and the economy less robust. At the very least there is no demographic bomb of younger cohorts being browner, poorer, and more Muslim than the older population.
The phenomenon of ‘White emigres’ from Bolshevism will return once more to Europe, this time in reverse to the east. And what they leave behind will be as close to hell on earth as anyone can recall in recent memory. Adieu, France.