Log In
Search
In this interview, UnHerd’s Editor-in-Chief, Freddie Sayers, questions Right-wing French philosopher Renaud Camus on his controversial theories of remigration and the “Great Replacement”.
Watch the full video above.
Thanks for doing this Freddy. This guy is off his rocker, with some pretty vile ideas. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, not censorship.
deleted
Freddie is such a throwback to the genteel statesmen. Fair and respectful but always skeptical.
Great spotlight on FW Taylor (and Ford) as the root of the globalists’ view of individuals as completely interchangeable. If an Algerian is altogether functionally equivalent to a Frenchman then who needs borders?
It’s hard to judge how much anybody’s continuing assertion of the blank state is pure taqiyya at this stage. Freddie’s got a job to keep and a line to toe.
Good to challenge Camus but…
Replacement is definitely underway but just because it has not completed yet does not mean it is not happening. Only question is whether it is specifically planned as replacement or not. Seems clear to me it is but…
Britain ruled but did not colonise India, Malaya etc. It colonised NZ, Australia, Canada. Rhodesia, Kenya were ruled and partly colonised.
Colonisation depends on the attitude and power of the immigrants. The Ugandan Indians immigrated to but did not colonise, or try to, Britain. Lots of the more recent immigrants, mainly/solely Muslims, definitely plan to colonise the UK and are demanding and getting enough power to make significant inroads. This needs to be reversed. Once that has been agreed we can sort out the fine details of who goes and how.
Personally with respect to Freddie Sayers (whom I genuinely respect) utterly ridiculous to use the conquest of England by the Romans and Normans (themselves a conflagration of the closely related Frankish and Scandinavian peoples) of England as some indication that England has always been some harmonious soup of different cultures.
Said invasions utterly transformed the societies making the natives effective serfs and this is supposed to be an endorsement of the “Yookay”? How can you report on grooming gangs, a (literally) two-tier justice system and the impoverishment of ethnic british communities to fund and support the mass immigration of people who hate them, and then act like Cathy Newman in the Peterson interview over the term ‘Great Replacement’?
The “great replacement conspiracy” is not a conspiracy at all; it is a fact of demographics. Falling white birth rates in this country means it is simply a question of when not if whites become a minority. The only way to counteract it is for white women to have more children with white men. As that is not going to happen any time soon, what we need to focus on is taking appropriate measures to integrate everyone into a fair society based on British values, rather than what we have been doing by promoting the rights of the foreigner over the indigenous population in the name of “social cohesion” – what a false god that is going to turn out to be!.
Net zero migration, as proposed by Reform, still means lots of new people coming in as those already here leave and it also means that our overall population will shrink at the same time as its median age rises further. That is not an opinion but an entirely provable through completely validated demographic modelling fact (we are right to scorn the outputs of models like Covid and climate change which are not validated / not even validate-able).
I view immigration as being like salt – none at all and you die but too much will kill you. There is no doubt that immigration has been far too high and a nuanced approach to controlling it is desperately needed if we are to have any hope of solving any of the serious structural and social problems the country faces. Remigration however has no part to play in such a nuanced approach – it would be like putting someone on a zero salt diet and then putting them on dialysis to remove all salt already in their bodies ie very rapidly it will kill them. All approaches will have their benefits and downsides. The Reform proposal is probably the least sub optimal in the short term.
Well done to unherd for this interview, which I personally had heard enough of after 15 min. Failing to have these discussions openly is what led to the trans fiasco, which has seriously hurt so many ordinary people. I also fear that the current work to define Islamophobia will be another smokescreen to prevent the serious grown up discussion we desperately need to have about Islam – it is essential that people like Tommy Robinson are part of that discussion and not excluded from it.