Book on remigration

 Foreword  by Martin Sellner

Nothing can stop an idea whose time has come. And the time for remigration has clearly arrived! This term, now on everyone’s lips around the world, was first coined in France as a political rallying cry by the Identitarians. Like so many revolutionary ideas, the concept of remigration springs from the Gallic spirit. The decisive notion at the heart of the diagnosis — that of the “Great Replacement” — has already been formulated by Renaud Camus, a representative of this revolutionary people.

This “replacement migration” which the globalist establishment cynically presents as a “solution for aging societies” is in reality an unprecedented political crime with devastating consequences. This transformation of European nation-states into Islamized, multi-ethnic entities constitutes an historic catastrophe unique in its kind. It erodes the irreplaceable “social capital” founded on relative ethnocultural homogeneity. The mass naturalization of unassimilated migrants raises the question of “ethnic voting.” Demography devours democracy: we are losing our right to self-determination, and with it the possibility of a turning point. If we do not stop this process and reverse it, Europeans will become minorities in their own countries.

This diagnosis has united the European right since the beginning of the 21st century. The common enemy has given us, as Carl Schmitt put it, a figure. The question of population replacement has given rise to a community of destiny that transcends national borders. But what this identitarian and international movement long lacked was a unifying rallying cry, a clear objective toward which everything could converge. Thus came the hour of remigration.

It is profoundly significant that the rise of this idea is the fruit of a collective European effort. In the autumn of 2015, the slogan appeared for the first time on a banner in eastern Austria. Alongside fifty activists, we stood against the flood and blocked one of the routes through which millions of illegal migrants were being funneled into the heart of Europe.

The success of the term “remigration” is that of applied metapolitics. While the old New Right long contented itself with speaking of a right-wing Gramscianism, the Identitarians, from 2012 onward, put it into practice. Words are weapons, but they must first be forged. An idea becomes a blade for the mind when it is carried into the streets, painted on banners, broadcast in videos, and proclaimed through actions. The aura of political ideas must be charged through deeds. Years of tireless work, thousands of flyers, dozens of banners, and the idealism of hundreds of young women and men across Europe were indispensable to bring “remigration” out of the niche of patriotic circles and propel it right into the heart of public debate.

Millions of people now understand the same thing when they hear this term: with “remigration,” in 50 years, France will become more French again, Germany more German, and Europe more European than it is today. Remigration is therefore more than a political program. It is a mobilizing myth and a vector of unity. As the lowest common denominator, it directs, just like the lambda of the Identitarian movement, patriots from all European countries toward the same point of convergence.

Remigration is so essential because it constitutes an axis. It is the junction point between activists and political leaders, progressive dreamers and conservative pragmatists. It is the axis that links party politics to counterculture. Boomers and zoomers, men and women, Christians and pagans, socialists and libertarians find themselves united and strengthened around remigration.

What unites them is this unshakeable certainty: either remigration becomes the central axis of the political agenda, or tomorrow there will simply be no more German, Italian, or European politics.

Unlike defensive conservatives’ incessant complaints about migrant violence, cultural decline, or Islamization, the rallying cry of remigration is not limited to mere observation. It is a call to action. This is where it becomes a mobilizing myth.

Sorel writes: “The myth is not a description of things, but the expression of a will by which a man or a group gathers to act.” In other words, myths do not explain the world, but rather drive men to transform it. Compilations of facts about demographic replacement may shock us, but only myths like that of remigration inspire political action.

Why, then, do we need books on remigration? Activism in the streets and on the Internet needs to be supported by theoretical work. As Alex Kurtagić wrote: “A slogan on a poster, a punchy formula […] all rest on a theory: they are distilled from complex concepts and value systems belonging to an abstract level. Millions of words are written before a banner is unfurled, before a slogan appears in a discussion.” With my book, I was able to offer a contribution from the German-speaking world.1  With Jean-Yves Le Gallou, it is now a Frenchman who in turn presents his own conception, thus completing the loop in the elaboration of this notion.

With typically French clarity and a brilliant command of language, he examines the phenomenon from every angle. He considers both the legitimacy of remigration based on our several-thousand-year-old European history and its logistical and legal feasibility. On the decisive points, our conceptions of remigration fully coincide. We demand the immediate halt of all new immigration (“the great pause”), the expulsion of illegal migrants and criminals, the dismantling of parallel societies, and the fight against Islamization. When it comes to the sensitive question that “moderate” right-wing leaders often avoid, Jean-Yves Le Gallou does not mince words. Unassimilated, hostile citizens who have been wrongly naturalized constitute a problem that a serious remigration policy cannot evade. Le Gallou naturally respects the principles of the rule of law and shows that there are many constitutional paths to exert pressure on such hostile parallel communities.

This manifesto is all the more valuable because its author is one of vast erudition and reasons on the scale of millennia. He deepens the foundation of the legitimacy of remigration and specifies the political-legal implications necessary for its implementation. In the 21st century, remigration is morally anchored in the unbroken historical continuity of European peoples on their continent. A line unfolds over more than 40,000 years: from the Western Hunter-Gatherers (WHG) to the Yamnaya, to the Early European Farmers (EEF). Expressed by a Frenchman, this decried — even “heretical” — message may perhaps be more easily receivable to a German audience: “We are the indigenous people of Europe.”

The “JUGEXIT” is also a decisive contribution to the theory of remigration. The dictatorship of judges is targeted without restraint. With striking clarity, this book explains how the invocation of the “rule of law,” when diverted from its meaning, becomes in reality a double negation of national sovereignty and popular sovereignty. A caste of judges, never directly elected, permeated by a progressive and globalist ideology, has seized control of migration policy. This is a coup d’état which has wrested from millions of Europeans control over their borders and their people.

This “government of judges” systematically obstructs deportations by ignoring — to the benefit of migrants — threats to public safety. It blocks laws aimed at limiting family reunification or combating welfare abuse. This dictatorship of judges transforms Europe into a ship of fools. Its motto is: “Fiat justitia, pereat mundus” — let justice be done, though the world may perish. Abstract principles are imposed without regard for their collective consequences.

This is why the demand for a JUGEXIT as formulated by Le Gallou imposes itself as a necessary consequence. We must return to the primacy of the nation and to the right of European peoples to historical continuity.

This book is a precious intellectual fuel, fit to further feed the fire of remigration. I am grateful for this welcome French support in the metapolitical battle for this idea. Others must follow.

All of the European intelligentsia is now called upon to develop political projects for remigration. We need analyses of the economic benefits. We need a comprehensive database and an assimilation tracking tool in order to develop detailed remigration programs. We need in-depth historical studies on remigration projects throughout world history. And we need justifications — in political science, philosophy, and on moral grounds — of the notion of peoplehood, of ethnocultural continuity, and of the deportation of foreigners.

This project is the vastest and most decisive in all of European history. One example is sufficient to convey its urgency: in 2025, Germany had 83 million inhabitants, yet there remain only about 11 million German women under the age of 40 without a migration background. This is less than the population of Germany in 1684, in the immediate aftermath of the Thirty Years’ War. The birth rate of these 11 million would be between 1 and 1.3. The next generation of women will therefore not exceed 6 million. From 80 million in theory to 6 million in only two generations. We are living in a demographic illusion, a mere optical effect created by the “majority” of baby boomers. When they disappear, the balance will tip. Our countries already carry within them a multi-ethnic state dominated by Islam. In 20 years, most baby boomers will be dead. This is the disturbing truth the media hide from us: we have only a window of 15 to 20 years to save our 40,000-year-old European heritage.

All the great battles of the last two millennia pale in comparison. All the great victories of the last two millennia will be worth nothing if we lose this fight. Neither Thermopylae, nor Tours and Poitiers, nor Vienna, nor Lepanto were more important than our struggle for remigration is today.

Over the next 20 years, the hopes and sufferings, the faith, blood, sweat, and tears of tens of thousands of years will converge toward a single point. This is the decisive message of this book, addressed to each reader: Europe must unite under the banner of remigration and accomplish this monumental work, or else it will sink forever into failure.2

**

Remigration: A Mobilizing Myth  

The only battles one is sure to lose are those which one does not fight. Remigration is a mobilizing myth. It affirms the right of Europeans to not be “Great-Replaced” or colonized. It affirms Europeans’ right to historical and cultural continuity. And let us be clear: the choice is between remigration or submersion. Without remigration, Europeans will become minorities in their own lands between 2050 and 2100, depending on the country. We have no right to leave this to the generations that are coming. This is the meaning of the message brought forth by the powerful Dutch influencer Eva Vlaardingerbroek: “Being at home in your own country and being safe there is not a privilege, it is your right, and therefore I demand to take back possession of my country. We Europeans must demand and reclaim our countries. I was born in 1996 and I am part of the Remigration generation.”

Jean-Yves Le Gallou

**

Consciousness of Being European  

The European Union is part of the problem, but European consciousness, the consciousness of being European, is one of the keys to the solution. Let us open our eyes: nationality has become meaningless, cheapened by birthright citizenship and naturalizations of convenience. What does it mean to be French when some speak of their (presumed) compatriots as “céfrans” or “gwers”?6 What does it mean to be German for those who bear the title but first pledge allegiance to Istanbul? What does it mean to be Swedish when your “countrymen” cover you with shame in the Danish islands? What is the value of being Irish when, after two centuries of emancipation struggle and a century of independence, the country finds itself overwhelmed by populations from elsewhere? What future is there for a Briton when his new “fellow citizens” intend to impose sharia on him? Hence, in patriotic demonstrations across the United Kingdom, the gradual replacement of the Union Jack by the Cross of Saint George (English), the Welsh dragon, or the Norman leopards of Sussex.

Nationality bound to citizenship has been cheapened; it is no longer sufficient to define identity. Other criteria must therefore now be used: origin, civilization, culture, religion. And to answer Samuel Huntington’s question in Who Are We?: we are Whites. White Europeans. White European Christians. Each person can then express this civilizational belonging through language and history, according to their national expression: French, German, English, Italian, Spanish, Flemish, Portuguese, Irish, Danish, Swedish, Finnish, Czech, Slovak, Hungarian, Polish, Baltic, Romanian, or Croatian…

The Chain of Solidarity of Peoples in Revolt  

These different expressions must not oppose each other, but converge. Europeans must stop quarreling over who gets stuck with the hot potato of invasion and distributing migrants that no one (rightly) wants. They must stop limiting themselves to pushing back, beyond the Alps or the Channel, illegal immigrants whose place is outside Europe. European realities demand a European response. Not the one promoted by the Brussels bureaucracy, but just the opposite. A chain of solidarity of peoples in revolt must be built: from the demonstrations in Dresden to those in London, from Dublin to Lisbon, from Porto to Warsaw, from Amsterdam to Krakow, or from Callac to Bélâbre (in rural France). Similarly, the growing solidarity between dissident governments and alternative political forces should be welcomed. No country in isolation will be able to escape a fundamentally cross-border phenomenon.

At Home Among Our Own  

In a depressed Europe, remigration can be a mobilizing myth, a project bearing hope. The hope of finding one’s country again, of reclaiming one’s history, of fully living one’s culture and civilization — with one’s peers and one’s own kind. The hope also of rediscovering the trust necessary to live in peace, the joy of walking the streets without fear.”

At home among our own” could be the slogan of remigration: understanding one another in one’s own neighborhood and sharing the same customs and traditions; allowing women to move freely, without needing reserved train cars or taxis; enabling young White boys to play football again without risking stab wounds; going to the swimming pool without being subjected to the antics of troublemakers; moving closer to a society with more freedom and less surveillance; gaining easier access to housing; finding reduced waiting times for care and less crowded emergency services; refocusing public assistance on our own and not on others. 

After the failure of living together, which became a living side by side, then a living face to face, let us rediscover the happiness of being among ourselves. This is also the condition for rediscovering Philia, civic friendship between citizens, the sharing of common values that allows, according to Aristotle, for avoiding discord and civil war. It also means responding to the expectations of the young generation that looks with nostalgia at sepia photos from the 1960s: an era they did not know, when Europeans still lived among Europeans, sharing the same customs, the same traditions, the same culture, and the same values. Finally, it is a matter of assuming one’s duty: transmitting to one’s descendants the heritage one has received.

Remigration: A Mobilizing Myth with Wind in its Sails  

Remigration is the myth that can empower peoples to take back the power seized by oligarchies. It is a double reconquest of sovereignty. First, internal sovereignty, that of the people, through the humbling of the mediacracy and the dictatorship of judges: JUGEXIT. Then, external sovereignty, through the revision of European treaties according to a triple orientation: the effective implementation of the principle of subsidiarity, implying a strict limitation of the competences devolved to the European Union; the primacy of national constitutions; the strengthening of the European Council, in accordance with the logic defended by Hungarian and Polish conservative circles.

European Identitarians, Unite! Remigration entered the field of political debate in 2014–2015. Ten years later, in 2025, three summits devoted to remigration were held in Milan, Oslo (in the presence of Renaud Camus), and Porto. Very many political formations, reaching up to 38% of the vote in Austria, have included remigration in their program: the FPÖ (Austria), the AfD (Germany), the SDS (Slovenia), Vlaams Belang (Flanders), the Forum for Democracy (Netherlands), the Sweden Democrats, the Democrats of Norway, the Danish People’s Party, Vox (Spain), Chega (Portugal), the Lega (Italy), Reconquête (France), the Homeland Party (Great Britain), as well as Law and Justice (PiS) in Poland. These parties work together in the European Parliament, associated either with the Patriots group, the Sovereign Nations group, or the European Conservatives and Reformists group. 

The American “big brother” is not disinterested in this struggle of White Europeans. Elon Musk participated via video conference in the great demonstration in London on September 13, 2025 under the slogan “Unite the Kingdom.” President Trump, on many occasions, and Vice President J. D. Vance, in his Munich speech (Spring 2025), have underscored the risk that the demographic submersion of Europe poses to civilization. Moreover, American policy shows that the reversal of migratory flows is possible, since they are now implementing it. But one must have the will to do so. Hence the importance of developing a common consciousness. European identitarians, unite!

Europeans today share a common mythology, drawing on Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Finnish, and Greek sources, while being inspired by Christian themes. This mythology finds a powerful expression in J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings. They must heed the call to the “free peoples of the West” raised by King Théoden at the dawn of the Battle of the Pelennor Fields:

“Arise, arise, riders of Rohan!”

Reemigration: For A Europe For Our Children 

Jean-Yves Le Gallou