The Meaning of May 68: Population Replacement and Hatred of the West

Last week student demonstrations in Paris revived fears of another May 68, although so far there is no indication that an event of any magnitude is about to happen. Gérard Pince, economist and founding member of the Blue Revolution attended one of the rallies and tells us why this is no May 68:

Having returned from the demonstration by high-school students, I can relate to you impressions that the media will be very careful not to show. [There were] around 10,000 persons. The front section of the parade was entirely composed of blacks and North Africans waving flags imprinted with the Islamic crescent. They represented one to two thirds of the total number of persons in the groups that followed. Let us remember that this sampling of students reflects the face of tomorrow’s France.
I must say, in all objectivity, that this youth demonstrated no hostility towards the police. I even saw a group of young black girls dance at Place de la Nation singing “Cops! We love you!” The rally broke up without any major incidents, at least as far as I know. I want to reassure you, a repetition of May 68 is not in the offing. We are witnessing a different phenomenon: that of our replacement.

Ivan Rioufol writes for Le Figaro. His column, though relatively cautious in tone, is still a voice of tradition and conservatism in the otherwise uninspiring French media. He also has been maintaining a personal blog within the context of Le Figaro's website, and offers some thoughts on May 68:

Yesterday on France 2, a good documentary put May 68 in the turbulent perspective of the times that witnessed revolts in Eastern Europe (Prague), the United States and even Mexico City. And yet, should we enshrine May 68 to this point, and present it as the liberation everywhere of a narrow and stifling society? The baby boomers had not even waited for 1968 to begin its entry into society. The Neuwirth Law had authorized the pill in 1967. A natural movement towards change was in the air. France would have become modernized without May 68. We can grant it is role as an accelerator. But we can also defend the notion that this “revolution”, because of educational and political inevitabilities, caused us to lose time. May 68 also aided in the setbacks and weakening that France is experiencing today.

As indicated, Rioufol remains cautiously optimistic about the situation today. He is unwilling to go so far as to use the term “irreparable damage,” or to analyze the tremendously coercive forces that cowed people back then into complying with the demands of violent infantile rebels. The powers that be (and that were) were clearly terrified and/or easily bought. This fear transformed our societies into politically correct robots, political correctness being a form of exorcism to chase away the devils of racial differences, intellectual inequalities and criminal intent. By denying the existence of racial and intellectual differences, or the hatred within the heart of criminals, they thought these unpleasant truths would simply vanish. And so the taboo on free speech became a type of "magic" employed to chase away demons that people simply could not face.

Besides Daniel Cohn-Bendit another celebrated communist from May 68, Benjamin Stora, manages to stay in the news in France. Stora, born in Algeria, is an historian and a specialist of Algerian immigration to France. He teaches North African history and French colonization at the Paris VIII-St-Denis branch of the University of Paris. A militant Trotskyist in May 1968, he was, until 1986, a member of the International Communist Organization, a group formed in 1965 as a result of a split within the Communist Party that had taken place in 1952. In 2007 he campaigned for Ségolène Royal. French readers can view a video of his rant in praise of Royal, in which he also extols the return of the authentic socialism which he had hoped would follow her election.

Stora wants to revive May 68 with ethnic minorities as his new tools for overturning the government. These ethnic minorities must “decolonize” themselves, the way Algeria broke French colonial rule. The French weblog Le Conservateur posted this critique of comments he made last week on France Culture radio:

[Benjamin Stora] proudly announced, with a tear in his eye, that 2007 was that last electoral victory of the Right, because soon new ethnic battalions “would upset the balance definitively.” Today Mr. Stora wanted to put us on our guard: staying within the spirit of May 68 is not a matter of commemoration but of mobilization. What is needed, according to him, is to instill in ethnic minorities and the underprivileged (including the notorious migrants created by the Left for its own political purposes) a taste for challenging the established orders, in particular the “ethnic order,” by drawing inspiration from the “decolonization” movements.
Must we be reminded of how the little powdered prophets of the salons of 1788 ended up, […] massacred by the very “tools” they claimed to be manipulating, and who completely escaped their control. Beware, Mr. Stora... You were forced to leave your native Algeria to save your skin. Your “protégés” might very well remind you one day that they had already chased you from “their territory.”

Stora’s thinking illustrates perfectly that massive immigration is a tool invented by the extreme Left to shatter European society, and to destroy it. There is no humanism here; his ideas reek of hatred. It is not freedom that Mr. Stora and his clique are calling for, but blood!

If Le Conservateur sounds a warning, its readers go further in denouncing Benjamin Stora, calling him an agent of the government in the service of Sarkozy’s multi-cultural project, and wondering how anyone can tolerate the Trotskyist and Maoist propaganda that spews forth every morning on France Culture radio.

More on May 68:

Remembering the Sixties, 13 February 2008

Rivers of Blood and the Mentality of 68, 14 April 2008

Dany at the Elysée: The Apotheosis of May 68
, 17 April 2008


As a defender of free speech not matter how repulsive, Saharian, a vulgar racist, would disappear if ignored.


Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch is right that that defending Western culture against Islam isn't a racial issue, it's a cultural/ideological issue.



Intellectual discrimination

I think that the quality of commentary can best be preserved by observing a couple of 'simple' rules.

-- First, DISCRIMINATE intellectually among posters. Recognise that not all comments are on the same intellectual 'level'.  Pick and choose, and select those with whom discussion might be 'fruitful', in the sense of allowing you to make a point, or perhaps inviting a counterpoint from which one potentially might learn something.

-- Second, ADDRESS the person to whom you are responding by name or pseudo-name.  The fact that you are responding to someone, conveys a certain degree of 'respect'.  It says that you think that this person is making a rational point, with which you might agree or disagree, but which might be worth exploring further with this person.

-- Third, IGNORE manifest nutcases and/or  provocateurs (like Saharian etc...).  Sometimes it might make sense to respond to a nutty comment, in order to make some valid point for purposes of information and clarification. In such cases it is best not to address the person directly, but rather to speak directly to the readership in general.  It conveys the message of disbelief that discussion which such a character could be useful.  

So, I disagree with Traveller on this specific point.  Censureship should be avoided.  Ignoring nut cases is the best way forward.  

@ marcfrans

Perhaps you are right, but I don't want this blog in difficulties because of this nutcase. What he wrote is definitely illegal in Belgium.

@ Saharian

Since nobody can be as stupid as you are pretending and showing us, I suspect that your motives for posting here are totally different. You are trying to get this blog into difficulties with the law in Belgium. Therefor, and for the first time of my life I suggest to Paul and Luc to ban you from this blog to protect themselves. I have pleaded with Paul to keep Amsterdamsky and others in order to keep free speech intact but in your case I feel that you want to harm this blog.

F... off.

It's because the left sees everyone as economic units

No matter what culture or religion, the left believes everyone in the working class will go through the same Marxist-worker cycle to eventually overthrow capitalism, and of course, this is supposed to be an international movement. Even the not-so-hard left doesn't mind importing potential grievance class voters.

And the great irony is there's another major force that also sees people as economic units: big business. And so you have this odd alliance of the left and big business in being pro-immigration, because neither believes much in the importance of culture; and, after all, in multiculturalism, all cultures are equal, anyway.