Cheese eating surrender monkeys?

Posted by Matra on November 03, 2005, 04:38 PM | #

“Now, here’s an hypothetical scenario worth thinking about: The year is 1992. Violent mobs roam the streets of Los Angeles. President George Herbert Walker Bush refers to the rioting blacks as “scum”. What happens next?”

If President Chirac had called them scum it would’ve been a bigger deal and comparable to Bush doing so. Sarkozy, the Minister of the Interior, has been roundly condemned by the French elite for his remarks - even the Prime Minister de Villepan appeared to criticise him yesterday. Though I agree that a US officeholder of similar standing would’ve been in bigger trouble for such remarks. (Chirac, incidentally, has been begging the rioters to stop).

Sarkozy (Hungarian Jewish I think) is a 2007 presidential hopeful but he’s not as tough as he appears. When Schwarzenegger was elected in California Sarkozy was filled with praise for America for being willing to elect an immigrant with a strong accent. Sarkozy favours more ‘positive discrimination’ for Arabs as well as state funded mosques. He even goes so far as to favour giving North african immigrants who are not French citizens the right to vote in municipal elections. In short he’s an integrationist. Nevertheless, he’s still tougher than anyone in office in the US, UK, Canada, or Spain.

Posted by Phil on November 03, 2005, 04:50 PM | #

Matra,

But I didn’t endorse Sarkozy; only used his use of the word “scum” as an example of the difference between the US and France.

France is not a healthy nation the way it is now. But is infinitely healthier than America without a shadow of doubt.

Posted by Matra on November 03, 2005, 04:55 PM | #

One disadvantage Europe and Canada has in the coming struggle is their oppressive anti-free speech laws. We all know pathetic the US MSM is but at least you can’t be prosecuted (yet!)and even sent to jail for criticising immigrants in a newspaper or starting a website like Vdare or Majority Rights.

The great historian Helene Carrere d’Encausse:

“French television is so PC that it is simply a nightmare. We have laws that not even Stalin could have devised. A person risks being sent to prison if he says that there are too many Jews or blacks on television. People may not speak their minds on ethnic groups, World War II, and many other things. This is a statutory offence.

Here is one example: We at the French Academy award prizes to books that we consider interesting. Last year, we awarded a prize to a person who had written an in-depth study on slave trade. The French Senate also gave him an award. But then a female MP demanded that he be put on trial for violating a law that she initiated two years before. Under this law, all issues related to the history of colonization, deportation, and Africans may only be covered from a certain perspective. So the author of this historical study will go on trial because he was allegedly not critical enough of the colonial system. How is that for a democracy?”

I hope Sarkozy, as a government minister, has immunity from such laws.

Posted by Phil on November 03, 2005, 05:01 PM | #

One disadvantage Europe and Canada has in the coming struggle is their oppressive anti-free speech laws.

Those laws can change. All the Anti-Free Speech laws couldn’t prevent Le Pen from finishing second in the last Presidential Election.

And there is nothing to say that America’s days as the haven of free speech aren’t numbered. Given the amount of money being poured in by various parties to do this, it may be a matter of time.

I think Europe has a better chance of survival because you cannot run away from the problems so easily here - as you can in the US or Canada.

Canada is finished by the way. Trying to save it would be a waste of time and money.

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 03, 2005, 05:48 PM | #

A couple points.

1) The neocons planners in the media and government have been instrumental in re-writing the history of relations between France and the United States. This is part of larger strategy to separate Euro-Americans from the true history and culture heartland in Europe.

France (then a Monarchy) was instrumental in our war for independence. When US troops returned to France in 1917 we did so on behalf of General Lafeyette, expressing our gratitude for French assistance, during our war for Independence.

So, I will NOT participate in the slandering of my European brothers, e.g. Old Europe vs New Europe. I wonder if Wolfowitz or Frum ( or some other Jew) wrote that line for Rumsfeld?

2) The same cast of characters - Bolshevik gangsters really - that importing Muslims into France are the same gang that has thrown open our borders and invited the Mestizo in to rape our women.

3) The French, English, Euro-Americans all face the same menace.

Posted by Phil on November 03, 2005, 06:03 PM | #

Geoff,

The immigrant problem in Europe has many facets to it and the “Jewish influence” element is much smaller than in the US.

Many European nations that opened their borders to third world populations in the 1960s did not even have a Jewish population. In other cases, Jewish populations did exist but their influence was actually marginal.

There is no denying the fact that Jewish organziations in Europe looked at immigration favourably because it introduced more minorities in societies where they had hitherto been the only minorities. But a far greater factor in Europe was the evolving “social democracy” model as expressed through the writings of (White gentile) writers like Gunnar Myrdal.

Practically all of Scandinavia fell squarely under the influence of such writers post WWII. And it is they who introduced huge numbers of immigrants into Europe to demonstrate their moralism and their tolerance.

Posted by Matra on November 03, 2005, 06:04 PM | #

Those laws can change. All the Anti-Free Speech laws couldn’t prevent Le Pen from finishing second in the last Presidential Election.

With a whole 18% of the vote! Didn’t he get something like 12% in the late 80s. Yes, it is progress but there’s a long way to go and many millions more need exposure to alternatives. The establishment will be more determined than ever to keep their ‘anti-hate’ laws in place. I agree it can’t last forever there’s bound to be a showdown but those laws limit the number of people willing to speak up. In the meantime imagine having to depend on the House of Lords to delay the passing of such laws!

Canada is finished by the way. Trying to save it would be a waste of time and money

Canada, the state isn’t worth fighting for. But even today large sections of Canada are between 97% and 99.9% white, though only some of these areas have a strong sense of identity. As I’ve said here before in order to preserve Canada (the nation) the break-up Canada (the state) may be necessary! It almost happened 10 years ago this week and, happily, the separatist issue isn’t going away. Regional animosity is also on the rise with much of it directed at Toronto where 40% of all immigrants live. Things are dire but there’s still some hope.

A major conflagration in Europe or the US would also help concentrate minds. At present I believe a majority in Canada (and probably every Western country) oppose what is happening. They just don’t consider it a priority. Getting them to make it a priority is the main challenge.

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 03, 2005, 06:09 PM | #

> The immigrant problem in Europe has many facets to it and the “Jewish influence” element is much smaller than in the US.

Who says? I’d bet the immigration ministers and immigration bureaucracies are staffed with Jews way out of preponderance with thier numbers…. and until someone shows me differently that is my opinion.

Oh, I don’t expect very quick action on that… for such an investigation would probably be considered a hate crime. How convienant.

BTW, is was Jonah Goldberg that invented that cute phrase cheese eating surrender monkeys.

PS: But, Phil, I do agree Europe (Minus Britain) is probably less throttled by the Jewish grip than the USA, which for all practical purpose is a Jewish colony with regional capitals in Hollywood and New York.

Posted by Phil on November 03, 2005, 06:22 PM | #

With a whole 18% of the vote!

Those laws depend on public opinion. Never underestimate the power of public opinion. And public opinion is currently witnessing dramatic scenes never before seen on French Television.

We are witnessing the first event in what could the the beginning of the end of Multiculturalism in Europe.

Anyway, one of the areas where I disagree almost completely with the crowd here at MR is on this idea that we have a wicked elite with godlike powers that can do almost anything it pleases - public opinion be damned. If that was so, Denmark and Holland would not have witnessed such a sea change in their political environments. The Danes (as well as the Dutch) were among the most liberal nations in the world. They aren’t any more!

So even though public opinion currently conflicts with the opinions (and interests) of the Elite, it doesn’t influence public policy because people simply do not feel sufficiently strongly about some of these issues. The great mass of the public is more attached to its comforts and their own daily pursuits. In the US for example (and in Britain too), the Economy trumps everything. If the Economy is doing well, Governments can get away with murder. And as we see in Britain, Tony Blair has reaped the dividends of a booming economy even though the Public loaths his immigration policies.

But riots of the scale now occuring in France destroy that sense of comfort (and indifference). You simply cannot sit on your bum and drink lager (or red wine) when the neighbourhood next door is turning into a European version of Compton.

So I think the next ten years will be the most interesting in European politics since the end of WWII.

Posted by Matra on November 03, 2005, 06:44 PM | #

From Mark Steyn’s Mailbox someone in England wrote the following:

A friend of mine works in the Birmingham area, and he told me a story of when he went to pub with a workmate for a lunch break. He noticed the people there were all white. Two or three young Asian men came in and asked for a drink. A couple of huge locals went up to them and told them to go away in a forceful manner. My friend was shocked at such open racism. Then his colleague told him that the Asian lads were scoping the pub to see what response they would get. If they got served and got no hassle they would return with 2 others. Then 20 others. Within a few days the pub would be their turf, and any white man entered on their terms only. It was the only “white” pub left in that area.

It’s an ugly side of Britain, but it is happening. While Tony Blair talks tough on terrorism and preaches understanding and integration the streets are increasingly becoming controlled by Asians.

http://www.steynonline.com/index2.cfm?edit_id=30

I’ll bet the white pub where they chased out the Asians was working class!

As I think Phil suggests, economic prosperity gets in the way in the fight against multiculturalism. One of the reasons anti-immigrant Canadians haven’t resisted the invasion is that they are all doing so well - the big house, the new car, the summer cottage by the lake, the winter pilgrimage to Florida and the Carolinas. Those with little to lose are more willing to fight. In the past Europe’s white working class have got hung up on class envy issues at the expense of ethnic and national solidarity. I think that’s changing.

Posted by Manfred on November 03, 2005, 07:27 PM | #

The phrase “cheese eating surrender monkeys” actually comes from Homer Simpson.

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 03, 2005, 07:28 PM | #

Manfred,

You’re right. Well, it just goes to show you how unplugged I am. But aren’t the writers of The Simpson’s Chosen?

Posted by Manfred on November 03, 2005, 07:37 PM | #

I think Matt Groening, the creator of the programme, is a Jew.

Posted by Geoff Beck on November 03, 2005, 09:01 PM | #

Phil, speaking of L.A.:

(Sorry, off topic again)

Ex-deliveryman accused of murdering 10 L.A. women

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A former pizza deliveryman accused of being one of the city’s most prolific serial killers was ordered Tuesday to stand trial on charges of murdering 10 women, two of whom were pregnant…

http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2005/11/02/serial-killings.jpg

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-02-la-serial-killings_x.htm

Hat Tip: Craig Cobb

Posted by John S Bolton on November 03, 2005, 09:10 PM | #

We can’t all get along, if some of ‘us’ are subhuman. I said it then, and it is just as true and relevant now.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 03, 2005, 09:31 PM | #

“The French Interior Minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, has promised to send in special police units to ‘occupy’ difficult estates, describing urban gangs as ‘scum.’  ‘We’re not scum,’ says the man, ‘we’re human beings, but we’re neglected.’ “  (—from the linked article by BBC reporter Alasdair Sandford)

Not to niggle, but I’d say Mr. Sandford slightly mistranslated the term Sarkozy used, “

,” which—at least in U.S. English—doesn’t really translate as “scum,” but something a shade less pejorative, such as “trash,” or “riffraff.”  None of those is a compliment, of course, but still—“scum” is not how I would’ve translated “racaille” in this case.  It’s significantly worse than what he was saying in French. 

French-speaking BBC editors should catch these mistakes and correct them.  Standards, alas, haven’t been kept up since the BBC’s glory days which stretched from the twenties to, I’d say, the early eighties when, if I’m not mistaken, things began to slip. 

A more extreme case of mistranslation (not the BBC’s fault in this case, but that of Conrad Black’s wife, Barbara Amiel) happened with that brouhaha over the French ambassador to London’s calling Israel “un petit pays merdique” which clearly, especially in the context in which it was said, did not mean whay “shitty little country” means in English.  Miss Amiel, who heard the ambassador say the above words in French at dinner, was the source of the mistranslation, and mistranslated it either innocently, purely out of ignorance of idiomatic French, or knowingly and maliciously from a desire to make trouble for the French.

Posted by Andrew on November 04, 2005, 12:47 AM | #

Perhaps if the South of France heads the Revolution against it’s Northern Morons, then Maybe, just maybe France can survive, But “Franco-Arabia” is well on target at the moment, and Arabic will be the dominant language. No more French Kissing, hmmm.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 04, 2005, 01:21 AM | #

Peter Brimelow at Vdare.com:

” ’

of the Paris mosque and the president of the French Council for the Muslim Religion, said living conditions for Muslim immigrants in the suburbs were unacceptable. They “must be given the conditions to live with dignity as human beings,” not in “disgraceful squats,” he said.’

“Oh, yeah? Well, they can live with dignity back home. The plain fact is that these rioting immigrants should not be in France at all. By omission or commission, the government made a mistake in letting them in. It should now simply resolve, as a matter of public policy, to encourage them to leave. To a very large extent, this is just a matter of finding and removing their numerous taxpayer-funded subsidies.”
______

[Exactly right, of course.  At the very least, all rioters arrested in flagrante delicto who did not have four grandparents of the French race should be summarily deported to their, their parents’, or their grandparents’ country of origin and forbidden to return to France on pain of immediate arrest, fine, and imprisonment.  That’s the very least that should be done in the face of these riots and done right now, this instant (the sight of cattle boats departing Marseille and Le Havre each morning with hundreds of non-whites on board who were arrested in the previous night’s rioting, bound for their, their parents’, or their grandparents’ Third-World hell-holes of origin, will put a chill on this lot’s plans to continue their Parisian insurrection much longer).  Of course over the longer term it should go without saying that these racial/ethnocultural incomptibles need to be made to leave France and every country in Europe they’ve been invited into in excessive numbers (invited in by all the usual suspects) by every humane means including the withholding of every bit of their generous direct welfare payments, rent subsidies, medical benefits, utilities subsidies, and so on.  They have no business in France—CERTAINLY not when there’s no work for them there!—and need to get the hell out and someone needs to send Chirac, Villepin, Jospin, maybe Sarkozy, and a few dozen others with them.  Let them all go riot in Rabat to their hearts’ content. —F. Scrooby]

Posted by LiberalLarry on November 04, 2005, 05:54 AM | #

Something about Muslim rioters shooting at cops seems to be a good way to really ruin any chance of unity in France. The riots will lead to a greater Front National victory than previous elections.

“Can’t we all get along?” The difference between the L.A. riot and the Paris riot is that the third teenager hasn’t stood up and begged for the rioting to stop like King did. The difference between the riots is between a cop’s poor responce to a traffic citation and some dumb kids who electrocuted themselves.

This riot is way different than ‘92 L.A. It’s much more childish.

Posted by Pericles on November 04, 2005, 06:44 AM | #

Ah well, it was too good to last.

“Mr Sarkozy’s problem is that the country is only hearing the first part of his prescription - the repressive part.

Even if a majority believe hardline measures to be necessary to quell the disturbances, most French also have hot-wired into them a deep sense of social justice.

They expect a certain tone from their leaders - one that recognises there may be an “issue” at stake, and “underlying causes” to be tackled. They actually quite like the “langue de bois”.

So for once, Mr Sarkozy finds that his tough-talking is out of kilter with the national mood, which urgently wants a return to quiet and knows that the best way of getting it is if the government makes the right kind of gestures.

For a politician, it is the price to pay for speaking one’s mind.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4405572.stm

The above report also trainslates “racaille” as rabble.

We shall see if the French are hotwired with social or if they are the cheese eating surrender monkeys of this blog’s title.

Pericles

Posted by Steve Edwards on November 04, 2005, 09:22 AM | #

Gentlemen, what we are seeing right now is one of two things:

a) The destruction of western civilisation

b) The beginnings of a new renaissance

Tell me: which is it?

Posted by Kubilai on November 04, 2005, 09:57 AM | #

Steve Edwards asks an extremely important question.  My answer (hope) is B.  Though it would be quite helpful to the renaissance if the rioting was stepped up a notch or two and other countries joined in as well.  Let’s get this renaissance moving a bit faster, shall we?

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 04, 2005, 10:39 AM | #

B.

Posted by Matra on November 04, 2005, 12:19 PM | #

In the late 50s early 60s the French of Algeria (pieds noirs) were told by the so-called natives (FLN) who were fighting for independence from France, “the suitcase or the coffin”. In other words there was no place for Europeans in North Africa once they became independent. The pied noir people (10%, the same as immigrants in France today) ended up fleeing to Europe and to a lesser extent the Americas. Nobody has ever sympathised with those pied noir refugees - not even at the time it was happening. Perhaps one day the French nationalists will be in a similar position to yesterday’s FLN of Algeria whilst the Muslim immigrants will become the new pieds noirs. The suitcase or the coffin!

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 04, 2005, 12:59 PM | #

Yves St. Laurent, the Parisian haut-couturier, is a pied-noir.

Posted by Matra on November 04, 2005, 01:38 PM | #

Yves St. Laurent, the Parisian haut-couturier, is a pied-noir.

Last I heard he was doing benefits for the Parti Communist Francais. Let’s just say he is not typical of the pied noir exiles who are the base for Jean-Marie Le Pen’s Front National.

A better pied noir was Albert Camus. Though he started off a commie he bravely spoke out against Stalin and became an outcast amongst French intellectuals for doing so. I particularly like what he said when he picked up his Nobel Prize for literature - keeping in mind this was during the Algerian war when most of his fellow leftists were sympathetic to the Muslim rebels:

“I have to denounce blind terrorism in the streets of Algiers, which might one day strike my mother or my family. I believe in justice, but I’ll defend my mother before justice.”

That last sentence is as good as any at explaining the way the world works. When the proverbial hits the fan it is kin (ie family/tribe/nation) that matters.

Posted by Steve Edwards on November 04, 2005, 03:01 PM | #

Exactly the point. The only way this Renaissance is going to get going is if the violence escalates. The more carnage the better. Lock and load, Frenchies!

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 04, 2005, 04:34 PM | #

“I have to denounce blind terrorism in the streets of Algiers, which might one day strike my mother or my family. I believe in justice, but I’ll defend my mother before justice.”  (—Albert Camus, quoted by Matra, above)

Also, what’s justice for the North Africans in North Africa is justice for the French in France.  It works both ways.

“When the proverbial $#?% hits the fan it is kin (ie family/tribe/nation) that matters.”  (—Matra)

Damn straight!

Posted by ben tillman on November 04, 2005, 06:06 PM | #

Anyway, one of the areas where I disagree almost completely with the crowd here at MR is on this idea that we have a wicked elite with godlike powers that can do almost anything it pleases - public opinion be damned. If that was so, Denmark and Holland would not have witnessed such a sea change in their political environments.

But consider how tiny those countries are, even compared to France.  Centralization is the process that severs the tethers of bi-directional control.  In Holland and Danmark, centralization is purely conceptual, not physical.

Posted by Phil on November 04, 2005, 06:29 PM | #

Ben,

Watch the French Presidential elections of 2007 like a hawk. I think we might have some surprises in store.

Posted by ben tillman on November 08, 2005, 04:08 PM | #

One can hope.