What would remigration look like?

The parallel societies forming in Australia break social cohesion and threaten only future conflict. They signal an intention not to assimilate, and a desire to conquer. Is remigration a good response?

Fred Pawle:

[Austrian political activist Martin Sellner’s 2024 book Remigration,] is, in my opinion, one of the two most important books in the world right now.

The other is Mindless (disclosure: Mindless was written by my wife), which on the surface exposes the Marxification of the education system across the Anglosphere, but on a deeper level also explains how Western citizens came to blithely accept the destruction of their societies through the unrestricted absorption of hordes of unassimilated immigrants: their teachers taught them that multiculturalism (along with climate catastrophism, white colonial guilt and gender fluidity) was imbued with virtues that evil “far right” conservatives will never understand. …

It’s a coin toss to decide which of these is more pernicious — the brainwashing of our poor benighted youth or the rapidly increasing replacement of all of us in our own communities by immigrants — but together they are more than the sum of their parts. The West has an existential fight on its hands, and it’s about time more people woke the hell up about it.

Sellner makes his case methodically and diplomatically, but doesn’t pull his punches: “If conducted with dignity and discretion, [remigration] is not merely morally justified; it is our national and ethnic duty.”

He starts with a definition. Remigration is more than mere deportation. The latter involves kicking out anybody who legally doesn’t belong…

Remigration …  is the removal of all people who are a drain on the host nation and do not share in its culture or contribute to its collective wellbeing: …

1. Asylum seekers. If they arrived needing legitimate asylum, fine. But eventually they must leave. …
2. Burdensome foreigners. These are people who have conjured permanent or long-term residency through marriage, student visas and other methods. … Such immigrants should be made to feel unequivocally unwelcome. This could be done by stricter controls over their movements, a separate social system, taxation on remittances and so on.  …
3. Non-assimilated citizens. These people remain a burden despite being granted citizenship, and must also go. Here, Sellner is careful not to advocate for the state to expel people based on ethnicity, religion or other categories. Such power will always eventually be abused by the state. In some cases, removing citizenship is legally plausible, but for the most part discouraging unassimilated parasites (my word, not his) is a long-term project that involves, again, making them feeling unwelcome while creating inducements for them to move to another country. …

Sellner goes into considerable detail about establishing model cities in north Africa, in partnership with other governments, that are eminently more familiar and comfortable to the migrants who currently sit in crowded terrace houses or hostels throughout Europe plotting ways to rape and kill the people who extended to them the hand of hospitality (again, my words, not his). …

This is a profound topic. The survival of Western Civilisation depends on us reclaiming our own societies, and robustly excluding those who don’t speak our language, contribute nothing, leech off our welfare systems or, worse, do us harm.

Basil the Great on a speech by Rupert Lowe, leader of Britain’s Restore Party, which advocates remigration.

Those who:
– Refuse to work
– Claim benefits
– Live in social housing
– Hate our way of life
– Commit crime
– 2nd Gen who commit serious crimes

These are all legal migrants, they will all be deported

Combine that with the illegal migrants Restore have committed to deporting, and you’re talking about potentially 5-7 million people. …

Restore Britain have already pushed the overton window repeatedly and continue to drag the country along with it as time goes on.

John Carter:

Remigration is not politically unacceptable in Canada. Quite a substantial fraction of the population already supports it.

White advocacy in a multicultural context might sound very nice, but it simply won’t be allowed. It doesn’t matter that it would be reasonable, fair, and equitable. Non-whites are not interested in being reasonable, fair, or equitable. They’ve got a good thing going and have no intention of giving it up. They’re going to call you a Nazi for advocating for whites to be treated fairly, just like they’ll call you a Nazi for advocating for remigration.

Commenters:

The idea that they can be imported in masses *illegally and against our will* but cannot be exported in masses because “legality” is ridiculous.

You simply sell remigration to Canadians as the compassionate option of returning people back to their home countries to live with their people so that Canadians can live with theirs. …

Canada is now a full blown anti-white apartheid state. …

If you keep treating your opponents as honest actors, and that this is all happening by accident, or for some benevolent public good that you can’t understand, I’m sorry but you are a useful idiot at this point.

Your government hates you, they are doing this on purpose.