On 22 October 2017, the writer Renaud Camus published on his Twitter account the following message: “Le génocide des juifs était sans doute plus criminel mais paraît tout de même un peu petit bras auprès du remplacisme global”. [The genocide of the Jews was no doubt more criminal but it seems like small beer compared to global replacism”.
The UEJF will file charges against Renaud Camus for disputing crimes against humanity and public incitement to racial hatred. Renaud Camus, far-right ideologue has already been convicted for his theory of the Great Replacement.
For the UEJF, not content with inciting hatred towards those he considers responsible for “global replacism”. Renaud Camus adds to it a pernicious form of revisionism which consists of minimising the process of extermination of more than 6 million Jews in Europe.
For Sacha Ghozlan, president of the UEJF “Renaud Camus makes competitive victimhood and incitement to hatred his stock in trade. The social networks that find the resources to protect copyright must assume their responsibilities and make use of effective resources to prevent their platforms becoming vectors of hatred.”
The UEJF is the Union of Jewish Students of France.
Renaud Camus was a reputed novelist and author before he became actively engaged in politics. He invented the concept of the “Great Replacement” which has been taken up by Generation Identity among others and which you now come across quite often in mainstream discourse on the continent. It’s a kind of more normie-friendly version of “White Genocide”. And it is this disjuncture between the two concepts that sparked off a Twitter spat that has now resulted in legal action. Camus switched from talking about the “Great Replacement” to the explicit use of the word genocide to describe what is happening, accompanied by Hitler comparisons.
This is what takes me to another very powerful word that I have rejected for a long time and that today I need to at least take into consideration: genocide. I rejected it for ten years out of respect for the Hitlerian Genocide, and due to the unique character of their industrial extermination. The genocide of the Hutus did not have the same scientific character. But it also consisted of mass slaughter which seems to have eluded us for now. Can we speak of genocide where, as at present, there are no gas chambers, no Shoah by bullets, no systematic blow-by-blow with machetes? I think it is necessary if we are going to wake up the people who are asleep and draw their attention to the enormity of what is happening.
Reacting to a Tweet that showed this image, described as “a school in England”, he said”Genocide by substitution, the crime against humanity of the 21st century”.
His response to this was Various tweets followed in which he was pressed on his use of the word genocide but continued to defend it.
I compare, what is not to be considered comparable, the atrocious death of six million people with the sinister eradication of six hundred million.
In the past, Camus has generally focused his criticism on Islam specifically and the replacement of populations (“Replacism”) more generally. He has already been convicted three times of “hate speech” and his writing career has suffered due to his political engagement.
I don’t really want to criticise Camus too much when he is already under pressure. He’s a good guy and has put himself out there on the front lines where he is actively suffering. But he has a blindspot when it comes to the Jews.
Here, today, we have someone raising the JQ with him.
“The Jews are in favour of the Great Replacement, it’s been noted for 2000 years, their goal is destroying Christians.”
To which he replies:
“No, it’s totally false. They are the first victims and our allies in the resistance.”
Remember this is even after he knows that the Jews are suing him.
It was the same last week.
He says: “How can antisemites denounce the Jews as being responsible for the Great Replacement when they are its first victims?”
I replied, recommending that he read Culture of Critique. If he does, he will probably become red-pilled to the Jewish Question, which will no doubt put him in even greater legal jeopardy.