V Reynouard Political reflections Comments closed on A new “anti-racist” law: repressive madness is getting worse
Reading time: 12 minutes
[source: https://blogue.sansconcession.net/2024/03/une-nouvelle-loi-antiraciste-la-folie-repressive-saggre ]
In this article, [the revisionist and national socialist] Vincent Reynouard analyzes the bill aimed at strengthening the repression of comments deemed politically incorrect, which was recently adopted by the National Assembly. Repression of non-public comments, arrest warrants, non-suspensive appeal of the sentence: the repressive madness is getting worse.
On March 6, the National Assembly adopted a “proposed law aimed at strengthening the criminal response against offenses of a racist, anti-Semitic or discriminatory nature”. It should be added to the already impressive arsenal of texts of this type: Pleven laws (1972), Gayssot (1990), Perben I (2003) and Perben II (2004). Laws of December 30, 2004 (creation of “the high authority for the fight against discrimination”) and January 27, 2017 (fight against “transphobia” and extension of the Gayssot law to certain war crimes such as the Oradour-sur massacre -Glane ).
The French National Assembly (like the US House of Representatives) on the Bridge of Concord on the Seine River in Paris, the former Bourbon Palace from 1722
Repression of non-public comments
The text voted on March 6 illustrates the worsening repression. Until 2016, for example, “non-public defamation and insults” of a “racist” nature were punishable by a fourth class fine (750 euros). The law of January 27, 2017 extends these offenses to comments made “because of the gender identity of the victim”. In addition, comments deemed discriminatory would now be punishable by a fifth class fine (1,500 euros fine). With the bill adopted on March 6, “provocations, defamation and non-public insults of a discriminatory nature become offenses punishable by a fine of 3,750 euros”.
Soral, Ryssen, Le Lay, Dieudonné and Reynouard specifically targeted
But the main targets of our leaders remain the ideologues who express themselves via the internet. The drafters of the law are offended:
The odious Soral, condemned on multiple occasions […] still does not sleep in prison and continues to pour out his hatred as unbearable as it is lucrative 1 .
*** What chutzpah especially from the mouth of a Jew to defame us, the activists, for a supposed greed for money! *** Pointing to the “particularly unbearable phenomena facilitated by the internet”, the rapporteur, Mathieu Lefèvre, declares:
preachers of hatred […] pour out conspiracy theories with a lot of revisionism, apologies for crimes or misdemeanors, insults or provocations to hatred. Alain Soral, Hervé Ryssen, Vincent Reynouard, Boris Le Lay and Dieudonné M’Bala M’Bala are all examples. Your rapporteur undertakes to cite their names while denouncing their misdeeds, because we must bring to everyone’s attention the danger they represent 2 .
And MP Caroline Yadan clarified:
Concretely, the challenge of this bill is to be able to sanction the ideologues who are rampant in particular on social networks on the internet – these repeat offenders who are rarely present at their hearings and live abroad to escape their conviction, like the gentlemen Ryssen, Reynouard, Le Lay or even M’bala M’bala, to name only the most sinister of them 3 .
Arrest and committal warrants
To tackle this, the law is innovating. Eric Martineau declares:
From now on, and this is fortunate, the criminal court will be able to issue an arrest or committal warrant in the event of condoning crimes and contesting crimes against humanity 4 .
The report states:
This more direct response would thus put an immediate stop to the dissemination of hate speech by these individuals, harming their business […] In the case of individuals who often live reclusive or hidden, sometimes abroad, the possibility of issuing an arrest warrant appears essential 5 .
We could not be clearer: the arrest warrant will make it possible to actively track down the disseminators of revisionist theses who try to escape justice by going into exile or hiding. As for the committal warrant, it will allow them to be thrown in prison upon conviction in first instance 6 . Until now, in fact, the appeal and the cassation were suspensive, which could allow you to gain two or three years before being incarcerated. This respite will become impossible… Some will object that to be issued, a warrant must target a person sentenced to at least one year of imprisonment, i.e. the maximum sentence provided for by the Gayssot law. No doubt, but apart from the fact that this sentence is imposed more and more often, the report specifies that the court may “issue a committal or arrest warrant, regardless of the prison sentence pronounced when the facts are committed in state of legal recidivism . 7 “Now, Soral, Dieudo, Ryssen, Le Lay, Bourbon and myself are repeat offenders. Therefore, judges will still be able to issue warrants against us, regardless of the sentence handed down.
Non-public revisionist remarks now sanctioned
But another innovation in the law turns out to be more serious. The report announces that to “fill a gap which until now weakened our criminal response”, “ the defense and non-public contestation of crimes against humanity” will now be punishable. The document states:
Serious facts, not sanctioned today, could thus be punished tomorrow, such as contesting the existence of the Shoah within the framework of a community of interest, for example within a company. Your rapporteur welcomes the adoption of this new article which will strengthen the relentless fight that it is up to us to wage against racism, and more specifically anti-Semitism 8 .
Those who, during a private discussion between colleagues, or even between friends (with an intruder who was listening), will have supported revisionist theses, will therefore be able to be prosecuted and condemned. The ultimate goal is to prevent anyone, under any circumstances, from contesting the existence of Germany’s homicidal gas chambers. To those who accuse me of exaggerating, I will oppose the words of MP Jérémie Patrier-Leitus who declares:
It is not possible today to accept the challenge of crime against humanity, due to lack of publicity, when it manifests itself, for example, in the form of letters addressed to professors, to prefects, to elected officials of the nation or citizens. This amendment aims to more fairly sanction this type of behavior which maintains a harmful climate and which can contribute, among other things, to spreading denialist opinions and reinforcing different forms of discrimination, thus aggravating the fractures already dividing French society 9 .
It is clear: the spread of revisionism must be completely prevented, including when it occurs by word of mouth or through private letters. We will always have to remain silent… Jérémie Patrier-Leitus welcomes this:
Our law must assume unfailing firmness in this matter: even in a non-public setting, such comments are unacceptable. We cannot accept this violence and tolerate its trivialization. I am delighted with the provisions adopted by the Law Committee 10 .
The sophism of the anti-racists
The MP therefore equates any revisionist speech to an act of violence. Should we be surprised? No, because this worsening of repression is based on the sophism which is expressed as follows: revisionist theses sow hatred; However, hatred ultimately causes violence; therefore revisionist speeches must be repressed. This fallacy became clear during discussions of the bill. The preliminary report recalled:
On the merits, the Constitutional Council was led to recognize the constitutionality of article 24 bis of the law of July 29, 1881, which represses the contestation of crimes against humanity committed during the Second World War, in terms which underline the particular gravity of this offense. He in fact affirmed that “by repressing comments contesting the existence of such crimes, the legislator intended to sanction comments which incite racism and anti-Semitism” and that “comments contesting the existence of facts committed during the Second World War qualified as crimes against humanity (…) constitute in themselves an incitement to racism and anti-Semitism” 11 .
From the podium of the Assembly then, the Minister of Justice Éric Dupond-Moretti launched:
Based on deadly ideologies, discriminatory words and hate speech […] create the basis for violent acts. Indeed, after the words, there come the blows 12 .
*** Thank God that Jews are never violent!
Hence the orchestrated repression, in order to protect not only people, but also France, because “when France becomes racist, it ceases to be France” said the Gaullist René Capitant, quoted in the law report. It will no doubt be objected that purely revisionist speeches have never provoked the slightest violence. However, Jérémie Patrier-Leitus explains that this is unimportant:
Hate speech, whether made in public or private, actually constitutes a first step in the brutalization of public life. They tend to trivialize violence which can then be expressed by taking action, for more serious offenses or for crimes. They have now become so widespread that we can no longer wait for serious personal attacks to occur before taking real sanctions 13 .
***Taking action? Muslims are allowed to act..not being white.
r
In the name, therefore, of the precautionary principle, these people claim to justify anti-revisionist repression, even if Professor Faurisson’s presentations have never led anyone to attack Jews.
A repressive madness that will go even further
Caught up in their own crazy logic, our elected officials will always go further. Some even announce it. Commenting on the bill of March 6, MP Éric Pauget declared:
During the work in committee, we adopted several amendments which enriched the text. In particular, they create the offenses of non-public apology and contestation of crimes against humanity and additional penalty regimes for the perpetrators of non-public discrimination. Although these advances are in the right direction, they nevertheless seem insufficient to meet the demands of the rapporteur, who, like each of us, calls for zero impunity for preachers of hatred. This is why the Republican deputies tabled several amendments with a view to more firmly repressing these odious acts. Some aim to create offenses of non-public provocation to the negation or destruction of a State, or to make ineligible for office the holders of public authority who are guilty of racism or anti-Semitism 14 .
We are therefore warned: a day will come when anti-Zionist speeches held in private may be punished with fines and ineligibility.
The intolerance of the tolerant
Elected officials state it openly: they want to change society to make it ever more repressive. During the discussions on the law of March 6, Ecolo-NUPES MP Sandra Regol launched:
We have a duty to change society, to put an end to the culture of tolerance […] We must combat tolerance of racist and anti-Semitic remarks and hatred of others in all its forms 15 .
For his part, Éric Dupond-Moretti exclaimed:
I see in this bill a message of determination and, above all, of hope — the hope that future generations do not fall into xenophobia, racism, anti-Semitism and hatred of others, that they may, on the contrary, be proud of the values of the Republic and may young people spearhead our fight against these base instincts. While waiting for this hope to become a reality, it is essential, imperative, that the criminal law forcefully reminds everyone that hatred is not an opinion, but a crime 16 .
It’s clear: the government is forcing young people to reject “hate”, that is to say, to think within the framework of political correctness. As part of this recruitment, the teaching of History plays an important role. The authors of the proposed law write:
Of course, the fight against racism, anti-Semitism and all forms of discrimination is also a matter of education. It goes through school, pedagogy, learning history, meetings, example. Parents, school, educators, media, businesses, women and politicians: everyone must play a role 17 .
Our leaders are therefore orchestrating a large-scale, permanent and invasive manipulation operation in order to change society. The goal is to forge a world free from all discrimination. They want to create a Victorian type society, with the difference that the taboo will not be sex, but a set of “discriminating practices” called “racism”, “anti-Semitism”, “xenophobia”, “sexism”, “homophobia”, “transphobia”, “fat-phobia”… without forgetting the worst: “negationism” [Holocaust revisionism, etc.].
Big Brother watched the streets; with the penalization of non-public remarks, it will now monitor businesses, schools, gymnasiums, even houses and apartments. Because, let us have no doubt, a crowd of zealous little informers will crack down to denounce the authors of comments deemed indecent. China invents “social credit”, France will reinforce “social discredit”: those singled out will be prosecuted, judged and ostracized. All this in the name of an assumed intolerance, because it is seen as perfectly justified. During the discussions on the law of March 6, the Minister of Justice declared:
“Have intolerance only towards intolerance,” wrote the philosopher Hippolyte Taine. Today, I once again strongly express my firmest intolerance towards all racist, anti-Semitic or discriminatory behavior and speech, which are harmful parasites of our social pact, of our Republic 18 .
The complicity of the people
In his editorials [in the nationalist weekly newspaper Rivarol],
***
Slogan:”When the people stop respecting. they stop obeying.”
***
[editor] Jérôme Bourbon regrets the lack of reaction from the people. I emphasize that among the 148 deputies present on March 6, none voted against the bill. This is how the adage says that “we have the leaders we deserve”. Moreover, note the absence of plot: everything is announced, you just need to read the official publications. Alain Soral draws the same observation. In his work Understanding the Epoch , he emphasizes:
This Great Reset project isn’t even secret. It is simply denied by the big media and the agents of globalism, who count on the credulity and laziness of the masses not to go to the Internet where everything is accessible, project and program 19 .
*** Not just laziness and gullibility — a neurochemical attack via chemtrails! They chemically engender both anxiety and depression, both fear and defeatism, and this leads to COWARDICE!
We therefore always come back to the same conclusion: because they support or because they do not actively oppose, the people are complicit in their own assassination. As long as this remains the case, France will sink… Perhaps it is even already dead. In 1889, Édouard Drumont warned:
The union of men creates lies and maintains them: a society can hide its mortal injuries for a long time, mask its agony, make people believe that it is still alive when it is already dead and all that remains is to bury it.20 .
Will the French people refute this pessimism? The answer comes from him; salvation will come from him, provided he wants it and makes the effort!
.
.
.
Fortunately we Americans have a First Amendment, according to which all speech is legal, except for slander.
Let me define slander: Slander is when one impugns the reputation of a person or group with an indifference as to whether what is said be true.
To deny that one has committed slander, therefore, all one need do is claim, “If I did not believe what I said were true, I would not have said it.”
(Note that here if that _belief_ in the truth of one’s words is what is relevant — not the actual truth of them.)
What is taking place in France is therefore a threat to our Constitution, and so are the Chosenites who are obviously behind this threat.
Yes, and the truly alarming thing is it would now be banned to even speak confidentially with another private person over a beer or in a park. This is true Stalinism.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn got 12 years for a private letter (denouncing Red Army atrocities against German civilians).
Welcome to the no-normie-left-behind Great Awakening production. This madness of this LARP will get crazier and crazier until even the sleepiest normie wakes up and starts pushing back. It’s like being woken up by slaps in your face. The longer you refuse to wake up and start pushing back, the harder the slaps will have to be.