Talk:Guillaume Faye

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Guillaume Faye. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081201012140/http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/archives/vol3no2/mo-worldwara.html to http://www.theoccidentalquarterly.com/archives/vol3no2/mo-worldwara.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:18, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Yet again - the erasure of European identity

I have left a number of comments with respect to the continuation by the editors to remove the concept of indigenous European identity as having any element of essentialism which is precisely the opposite as what happens with every single other article for any other non-european people. You can't have it both ways.

In fact, the whole entire field of anti-colonialism is premised and rooted in a defense of indigeneity, in the claim that all people have a right to their own indigenous culture, self-determination, language and identity! But yet, use that same concept when critically writing about a neo-fascist while criticising him, and some intersectional incoherent hater of Europeans has to rush in and erase the very concept that there is anything indigenous about European people lest it offend someone who wishes to live there or someone who is there but is not an "ethnic" European, or a "white" European.

First of all I am not white and I am not European. But I remember this article since I wrote most of it initially. And what I wrote was that this man had applied a Nazi fascist template by building a false scapegoat out of the Muslims and Islam in order to provide the necessary template for the emergence of a European fascism. This has been rewritten to say non-white European Muslims with the line about which Faye wrote - that European identity is being denied and erased - VALIDATED BY THE VERY ACTIONS OF EDITORS ON HIS PAGE!!!

I wrote this article to criticize Faye and his ideas and then, like some sort of comic deus ex machina, someone went and validated what he was saying by doing that very thing on his page! Bravo!

A refusal to acknowledge that there is such a thing as a native European who is not Muslim given that this is a religion that's imported by force into Europe and who are native Europeans was almost literally Faye's argument. Why you would believe that importing a racist connotation of a white European, therefore creating space for a non-white European, is more acceptable, in a progressive world, escapes me!

Whoever is making these changes is attempting to balance contradictory and paradoxical concepts that can only be in the mind of an intersectionalist - a type of identitarian - but they do not work in reality or in practice because they contradict one anotHer. One is the notion of civic identity so that one can be an Englishman of any race, and the other is the notion that Europeans do not have a right to their own identity or culture in their own societies, which is to make room for the arguments that all those people migrating to Europe illegally ought to have a right to stay there.

Now apply these concepts to the indigenous American experience and try to reconcile what intersectional theory says about native rights and the right of the first peoples to their own identity control of their lands the right to set their customs and traditions to the exclusion of others and so on. It makes zero sense. Make up your bloody mind. In my view it is less harmful to say European people or european identity then to say white European people or white European identity as a distinguishing marker from those who live in those societies but aren't necessarily native to it.

Having one approach for Europeans - denying them the right of an indigeneity guaranteed by the Universal declaration of Human Rights - while denying them even the racial identity which is promoted for other races - and denying conceptions of native or state religion in those cultures, but openly defending the rights of Saudi Arabia for example to ban travelers were not Muslims from visiting Mecca is complete cultural and academic colonization of European people and their culture and additionally completely incomprehensible. Historiaantiqua (talk) 13:08, 26 December 2021 (UTC)