Gilles-William Goldnadel is a lawyer and essayist. Every week, he deciphers the news for FigaroVox.
Thus, this government, in violation of its commitments, has postponed the law to combat illegal immigration indefinitely.
The president would find the subject too divisive and the Prime Minister claims that there would be no parliamentary majority to vote for it.
At the same time, the Minister of the Interior sees his determination to face head-on the invasive immigration to Mayotte thwarted by justice and the Comorian State.
I want to show here how much and how the still dominant ideology paralyzes the will of a dominated people and of a wavering power.
Thus the subject of illegal and massive immigration would be "cleaving".
Read alsoPatrick Stefanini: "Mayotte has become a magnet for all regional illegal immigration"
Strange divide, while the latest CSA poll shows that 82% of French people, right and left parties alike, are calling for a law favoring the expulsion of illegal aliens.
Difficult to make more consensual.
In spite of quarantine decerebration and morally and intellectually intimidating intellectual terrorism, the French, in their vast majority and like many European peoples, note this cruel reality that the excessive and invasive immigration which has been imposed and which persists irresistibly represents an existential danger for their security, their prosperity, as well as, an almost forbidden term, their cultural and national identity.
But the president is not wrong for all that: the subject is divisive.
If the majority of the people are united in a front of refusal, they remain silent and immobile.
Only a referendum would be able to give him the means to impose his will.
Gilles William Goldnadel
Because if the majority of the people is united in a front of refusal, it remains silent and motionless.
Only a referendum would be able to give him the means to impose his will.
On the other hand, there is a predominantly immigrationist media power.
He has no legitimacy but has the ability to impress power.
The first pillar of immigrationism is therefore that of the media.
The second pillar is planted in the street on which the far left has a gable.
I have written several times in these columns that one of its victories will have been, in the context of the debate on pensions, which is so secondary to the existential debate on immigration, to have succeeded in imposing the economic on the societal.
I also reproached the silent majority for their laziness in marching to impose their will.
But, to be fair, I will plead mitigating circumstances for her, given the ability of ideologized media power to steer reality through a distorting prism.
Let's go into detail.
When a demonstration against the pension reform goes wrong, the violent acts of
antifas does not disqualify the organizers of the protest movement and their cause.
Suppose that tomorrow, a huge demonstration against illegal immigration is organized on the initiative of certain political parties and associations.
It is far from being excluded, it is even probable, that certain xenophobic or racist groups will invite themselves there and that one will be able to hear unsavory slogans there.
In view of our experience, there is little doubt that the dominant media ideology is able to discredit the most unassailable organizers.
This is likely to discourage the most determined defenders of the people's freedom from demonstrating their will.
And that is why the power in place is not wrong to fear the cleavage of the less legitimate noisy minority and not to fear the silent people under its yoke.
A fortiori when its will to fight against illegal immigration is quite relative.
We saw it in his stillborn bill where, while wanting to fight it weakly, he wanted, at the same time,
The third pillar of immigrationism is judicial.
He lives at the Council of State, where an ardent and lyrical promoter of multicultural inclusion was recently appointed to a strategic post.
Gilles William Goldnadel
The third pillar of immigrationism is judicial.
He lives at the Council of State, where an ardent and lyrical promoter of multicultural inclusion was recently appointed to a strategic position.
He remains at the Constitutional Council, which created from scratch the imaginary principle of fraternity to save the day for a Cédric Herrou who was going to look for undocumented migrants on the other side of the mountain.
And we have just seen him still at work in Mayotte to undermine the enthusiasm of the Minister of the Interior.
It is indeed a former vice-president of the Syndicat de la magistrature who will have innovated as a representative of the judiciary by suspending for abstruse reasons a prefectural decision to destroy an illegal shantytown, when it was not
Read alsoHow Borne made Macron give in on the immigration law
For more details, I refer my reader to the severe column of Jean-Éric Schoettl in
Le Figar
o on April 29, former secretary general of the Constitutional Council, whose competence in the matter is well known.
It is probably a cosmic coincidence that a few hours before this strange decision, the Syndicate of the judiciary had published a press release manifestly more political than legal to say all the harm it thought of a government action undertaken in Mayotte against the illegal immigration, which nevertheless has the support of the vast majority of desperate Mahorais.
For non-white peoples, the ethnic, national and cultural argument for maintaining endogenous development is not unseemly, even less nauseating.
Gilles William Goldnadel
The fourth and last pillar of the immigrationist temple is cultural and intellectual.
It is buried deep in the basement of the far left's unconscious, but by capillarity and in view of the media power of the latter, will have contaminated more or less all minds.
Nothing better than recent examples: This is the boss of Mediapart, relaying an interview with an ethnologist published in
Le Monde
, who wrote on Twitter:
"In Mayotte, Comorians are not foreigners and the government faces one population”
.
And it is the former minister Dominique Voynet who, in the same ethnic vein, declares on CNews:
“We must offer the Mahorais an endogenous path towards development”
.
Deciphering the leftist unthought: for non-white peoples, the ethnic, national and cultural argument for maintaining endogenous development has nothing unseemly, even less nauseating.
Read alsoIn Mayotte, the exasperation of the inhabitants in the face of ultraviolence and immigration
But why, barring racism against them, wouldn't the French in metropolitan France have the right either to aspire to take an endogenous path when there is still time?
Before it looks like the dead end of Mayotte.
