What share of France’s population is “diverse”, as the term is used today (i.e., non-European by ancestry)? People wonder, and — actually — it’s a bit of a mystery. Reliable racial data for France is hard to come by.
An anonymous reader sends this:
Although censuses on ethnicity are forbidden in France, the ethnic
origin of newborn babies in France can be derived indirectly from
national medical data on the prevalence of sickle cell disease which is
mostly peculiar to non-Europeans.
The results are shocking: in 2007, 28.45% of all newborn babies have at
least one parent originating from Africa (incl. North Africa), Middle East,
India or the Caribbean (see PDF attached). Fig. 1 has a break-down for all
French regions; note that in the Ile de France, basically Paris, 55.68%
newborns are of non-White origin. Box 1 gives the ethnic makeup of the
at-risk population (it also includes populations from some minor South
European states).
Share of Newborns in France deemed at-risk for sickle cell anemia, 2007. From “Neonatal screening for sickle cell disease in France” (Bardakdjian-Michau et al 2008).
According to [the same authors], the national share rose to 31.5% in 2010. [PDF]
Share of Newborns in France tested for sickle cell anemia, 2010, based on parents’ ancestry. From “Le dépistage néonatal de la drépanocytose en France” (Bardakdjian-Michau 2012).
Note that immigrants from other world regions like East Asians or
Latinos are not even in included in these percentages, so the actual
percentage of non-White newborns in France is even higher.
This looks bad. [End of communication from the anonymous reader]
As best I can tell from the wording of the study, 28.45% of babies in all of France (including overseas possessions) were deemed at-risk by health authorities based on their racial ancestry in 2007, and so were tested. Overseas-France has 4% of the official population of the French republic. The ‘Overseas French’, almost exclusively Nonwhite, produce 5% of the babies. But we already knew France had Nonwhite overseas possessions.
In terms of mainland France only, then, in 2007 about 25% of total births were deemed at-risk for sickle-cell (explicitly based on parents’ racial stock). (Mainland-only figure is derived by: [28.45-5]/95 to remove Overseas-French from the count).
Update and Correction: The 28.45% applies only to babies in mainland France. When including babies born to French overseas possessions (~100% Nonwhite), the figure for “France” would become ~33% in 2007. ([28.45+5]/105). The figure for mainland France rose to 31.5% in 2010, which means ~36% for all of France, incorporating overseas possessions.
.
From 28.5% to 31.5% in Three Years?
Why was there a three point jump in the share of newborns tested for sickle-cell anemia between 2007 and 2010? Was there:
(a) Some substantial change in the methodology health authorities use? Or,
(b) Did White fertility fall significantly in the global recession, with Nonwhite fertility much less affected? The latter seems more reasonable to me. Although, in the USA’s case, the recession more strongly affected Nonwhite fertility than White fertility (See: USA’s Fertility Rates by Race, 1980-2010).
Reliability of Sickle-Cell Test as Proxy for Nonwhite Population
Some Europeans are tested for sickle-cell, too: According to the study, babies with parents from Sicily and Southern-Italy, Portugal, Greece are all tested, as well as native-French from Corsica [0.5% of France’s population]. East-Asians, Latin-Americans, and other miscellaneous groups like Gypsies [as much as 0.6% of France’s population] are not tested. It’s probably about safe to assume that the number of ‘extra’ Nonwhites (uncounted by the sickle-cell test) is probably nearly offset by the number of native-Europeans tested. Generously, we could say babies of native-European ancestry from the listed regions inflate the overall share by a point or two, and to derive an actual Non-European estimate from this data we ought to subtract a point or two; maybe three, at most.
In summary, this is pretty firm and non-politicized data showing that about 30% of the babies being born in mainland France in the 21st century are of non-European ancestral background, with what may be a temporary spike in the Nonwhite share during the global recession.
Accounting for Mixed-Race Babies
Some of these babies will be partially White-European by ancestry (e.g., one White-French parent and one Arab parent). Thus, the overall share of Non-European ancestral-stock among the cohort born in France in 2010 will be lower than 31.5%, if you care to think of it in that way. That is, imagining all the babies born in France to be only 100, then 68.5 (or maybe a few more — see directly above) were full White-European babies, and (let’s say) 10 were half-WhiteEuropean (=the genetic equivalent of 5 White-European babies), = a hypothetical total of 73.5% White ancestry among French babies, collectively.
— — — —
Native Backlash
Given such a downright Raspailian state of affairs, it is no surprise that one sees…this:
We are Génération Identitaire.
We are the generation who get killed for glancing at the wrong person, for refusing someone a cigarette, or having an “attitude” that annoys someone.
We are the generation of ethnic fracture, total failure of coexistence, and forced mixing of the races.
We are the generation doubly punished: Condemned to pay into a social system so generous with strangers it becomes unsustainable for our own people.
Our generation are the victims of the May ‘68’ers who wanted to liberate themselves from tradition, from knowledge and authority in education. But they only accomplished to liberate themselves from their responsibilities.
We reject your history books to re-gather our memories.
We no longer believe that “Khader” could ever be our brother, we have stopped believing in a Global Village and the Family of Man.
We discovered that we have roots, ancestry and therefore a future.
Our heritage is our land, our blood, our identity. We are the heirs to our own future.
We turned off the TV to march the streets.
We painted our slogans on the walls, cried through loudspeakers for “youth in power”, and flew our Lambda flags high.
The Lambda, painted on proud Spartans’ shields, is our symbol.
Don’t you understand what this means? We will not back down, we will not give in.
We are sick and tired of your cowardice.
You are from the years of post-war prosperity, retirement benefits, S.O.S Racism and “diversity”, sexual liberation, and a bag of rice from Bernard Kouchner.
We are 25 percent unemployment, social debt, multicultural collapse and an explosion of anti-white racism. We are broken families, and young French soldiers dying in Afghanistan.
You won’t buy us with a condescending look, a state-paid job of misery, and a pat on the shoulder.
We don’t need your youth-policies. Youth IS our policy.
Don’t think this is simply a manifesto. It is a declaration of war.
You are of yesterday, we are of tomorrow.
We are Génération Identitaire.
Hail To You 
you wrote “in 2010 about 25% of total births were deemed at-risk for sickle-cell (explicitly based on parents’ racial stock”. Thats not correct.
31.5% in 2010 IS for mainland France (or metropolitan France) with 60% in Greater Paris.
Numbers per Region in metropoliatan France (2010)
Île-de-France 60
Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur 43,2
Languedoc-Roussillon 41,6
Rhône-Alpes-Pays de Savoie 31,5
Alsace 31,2
Midi-Pyrénées 30,6
Picardie 22,5
Limousin 21,7
Franche-Comté 19,7
Bourgogne 19,1
Lorraine 18,3
Centre Val de Loire 17,8
Auvergne 16,3
Nord-Pas-de-Calais 15,6
Champagne-Ardenne 14,9
Aquitaine 14,5
Normandie 13,8
Pays de la Loire 12,7
Poitou-Charentes 9,8
Bretagne 5,5
France métropolitaine 31,5
http://www.invs.sante.fr/Publications-et-outils/BEH-Bulletin-epidemiologique-hebdomadaire/Derniers-numeros-et-archives/Archives/2012/BEH-n-27-28-2012
Thanks for the correction.
What doesn’t make sense is, why would the rate for mainland-France be ~25% (according to the study) in 2007, but up to 31.5% in 2010? Was White fertility depressed so substantially by the global recession, but Nonwhite fertility hardly affected?
The entry was updated with corrections from the anonymous commenter, and a more coherent analysis section, including an attempt at guessing the share of White ancestry among the born-in-2010 cohort, when counting babies of mixed-origin.
A PDF for the 2010 study, that reported 31.5% of babies were tested, has been uploaded. A map of the share of babies tested by region is now included in the post
In Poitiers, where Charles Martel stopped the Muslim Expansion in 732, Génération Identitaire occupied the roof of a mosque demanding a referendum on Immigration and on the building of future mosques.
A bold action.
I see in the video that they brought out a “journaliste specialiste de l’extreme droite [right]” (Caroline Fourest). I guess she is telling the viewer how evil this “Generation” group really is. Will the same tired old attacks continue to work?
Charles Martel did not stop the Muslims. It’s a myth and historically incorrect
PDF of the study attached. To read it, click here [opens a PDF file].
Did White fertility fall significantly in the global recession, with Nonwhite fertility much less affected? The latter seems more reasonable to me.
I’d be careful about making too many assumptions. Fertility has been dropping in many parts of the Third World and also among TW-origin residents of Western countries (e.g. Hispanics in the US have had a strong drop since the recession, and this not counting the large drops already seen in many Latin American countries). The truth is that many of these groups depend on generous welfare handouts to maintain high fertility. I can’t imagine how that will go on in Europe, especially considering the dire fiscal shape the Med Bloc nations are in. But on the other hand, Europe’s corrupt governments don’t seem too keen on looking out for the interests of their peoples, so I doubt they’ll show much foresight in diminishing these pernicious trends.
I remember reading some information suggesting that native French had actually seen a rise in birthrates in recent years. I’ll look around and see if I can find that again.
Your point is well-taken. I remember similar statistics, several years ago. It was never clear to me what the racial dynamic was. “Native French” can mean those with parents born in France, which by this point includes many of Non-European ancestral origin.
This is a Danish TV interview with Mark Steyn where he talks about the demographic changes Europe is going thrue. To be somewhat acceptable in the MSM, Steyn only talks about the religion of this new demographic but it’s clear he’s not talking about religion.
Mark Steyn:
Later, on White civilizational-pessimism [6:40]:
Lawrence Auster on Generation Identitaire and its Mosque occupation:
Mr. Auster also republishes the group’s statement on the occupation, in English:
Very nice piece, a perfect juxtaposition of cause and effect. It was pretty ballsy of those kids to put their faces on that video; thoughtcrime witch-hunting is reaching fever pitch here in France (where I’ve lived for many years).
The whole leftist media establishment has gone bananas over the Poitiers protest. There’s even talk of President Hollande using a special law which allows him to dissolve an organization pretty much by fiat. This law’s been used in the past to break up militias, communist groups, islamist groups…Today’s bugaboo, of course, is ethno-patriotism, hilariously seen by leftists as the biggest threat to the nation while in fact their country is slowly becoming North Algeria.
I just stumbled upon those sickle-cell maps myself recently and was floored. I knew it was intense, but not at that level. France is abolishing itself before our eyes. One encouraging point is that like in the U.S., the comments sections on mainstream news sites are having a harder and harder time censoring the dissidents. I regularly save such comment threads for posterity, and there’s a generalized anger buzzing around now that I’ve not felt in the over ten years I’ve been here.
But yes, if the demographic damage is done…? At this point one would say it’s become a race to see which European capital will hand itself wholly over to aliens first. (with Paris and London neck and neck)
I am interested in the degree of Racialism among youth in various parts of the White world.
The first set of posts I made here tried to get a handle on that. It is not the kind of question one can get a direct answer to (much like the racial situation in France!). I found that Germany’s lower-class youth was shockingly Racialist, which fits with anecdotal evidence. In Germany, lower-class youth (under-30) are the most Racialist (“voelkisch”) of any age-class cohort currently alive, by my reckoning (see the post for the specifics). The most anti-Racialist Germans? Upper-class youth under 30! Perhaps around half of lower-class White-German youth told survey-takers that German ancestry should be important for German citizenship, an opinion that is probably close to being a crime in the Bundesrepublik…
(Other entries generally found the same for Whites: Norway, and Poland, and the USA. …Interestingly, among East-Asians, the age-class pattern was reversed — and upper-class youth tended to be getting more ‘Racialist’, while the lower-class slouched into race-apathy; see China, South Korea, and Thailand.)
Unfortunately, the survey did not look at France, that I remember, but I would hazard to guess we would find a similar pattern to Germany’s.
I’d never seen your posts on racialism by age and class groups, very interesting. The German lower-class youth numbers are striking, yes, but the Polish numbers (in absolute terms) are huge. No doubt their long history of subjugation to outsiders plays a role. Just in terms of youth action (skinhead groups, militias, etc.), I’ve always had the sense Eastern Europeans globally were more racialist than Germans, who were in turn more racialist than Anglo-Saxons or Scandinavians. But that’s just based on following the news, not any scientific study.
I’d be willing to bet that huge upper/lower-class divide among the young in Germany would be mirrored in France, though the latter doesn’t really have a strong history of racialist skinhead-type movements. To be honest, the Poitiers mosque action by ‘Generation identity’ has really thrown France for a loop. The group is brand new, just founded a month ago. They’re in fact having a conference in the south next weekend, I don’t live too far so I’m going to try to get over there. Very curious about just who these kids are, their backgrounds, etc. Also, if I see any kind of comparable survey to the WVS one about France, I’ll send it your way (translated if need be).
Pingback: quarter of u.k. babies born to immigrants « hbd* chick
you wrote
Sorry, but again this is not correct as according to the 2012 study (http://www.invs.sante.fr/pmb/invs/%28id%29/PMB_10831) , to be tested a newborn must have his BOTH parents (” Les deux parents doivent être originaires d’une région à risque”) from a region defined at risk (and Corsica is no longer included) in 2010 which are:
In French from the study (http://opac.invs.sante.fr/doc_num.php?explnum_id=8316):
“Origine géographique des populations concernées par la drépanocytose (régions à risque) :
*Départements français d’outre-mer : Antilles, Guyane, la Réunion, Mayotte
*Tous les pays d’Afrique subsaharienne et le Cap-Vert
*Amérique du Sud (Brésil), Noirs d’Amérique du Nord
*Inde, Océan Indien, Madagascar, Île Maurice, Comores
*Afrique du Nord : Algérie, Tunisie, Maroc
*Italie du Sud, Sicile, Grèce, Turquie
*Moyen-Orient : Liban, Syrie, Arabie Saoudite, Yémen, Oman
Actuellement, pour que le nouveau-né soit testé :
1- Les DEUX parents doivent être originaires d’une région à risque.
2- Un seul des deux si le deuxième n’est pas connu.
3- S’il existe des antécédents de syndrome drépanocytaire majeur
4-S’il existe un doute pour les critères 1, 2, 3.”
Also from the study “En métropole, 31,5% des nouveau-nés ont été ciblés pour dépistage, avec une répartition très hétérogène, le pourcentage allant de 5,5% en Bretagne à 60% en Île-de-France en raison des différences d’origine dans la population parentale (figure 3). Ce pourcentage n’a cessé d’augmenter depuis l’instauration du dépistage (il était de 19% en 2000).”
which means that the newborns at risk were “only” 19% in 2000 and increased by 65% to reach 31,5% in 2010 due to massive immigration from mainly African countries these last 10 years.
pgil,
please note that the qualification that only newborns with BOTH parents coming from a risk region does not seem to apply for the 31.5% figure from 2010: table 1 to which you refer gives it criteria for ->2012<-, but the numbers given above refer to 2007 and 2010. So, yes, they must have changed the screening criteria for 2012, but they don't affect the numbers above. However, the new 2012 screening criteria, once published in two years time, will give us an even better idea of the extra-European share of newborns as now babies with one European parent are excluded.
You are right though about Corsica which was included in 2008, but not anymore in 2010. But its share of the total French population is anyway small, around 0.5%, not more.
The French government collects good statistics regarding the origin of French parents, as the wikipedia page on the demographics of France attests to. In 2010, 10% were born to two parents of non-European origin, and 14% were born to at least one parent of non-European origin. So, 30% born to at least one parent of non-European (racial) origin seems about right, considering that there are North Africans who were born in France.
Having said that, it is worth noting that the largest group, Algerians, is pretty Caucasian A lot of the Algerians in France are Khabyles. This woman is half-German, half-Khabyle:
addendum: …that only newborns with BOTH parents coming from a risk region ARE SCREENED does not seem to apply for the 31.5% figure from 2010….
Correct me if I’m worng. But it’s my understanding is that sickle-cell occurs only in Sub-Saharan Africans (e.g. negroid ethnicity) and not in Arabs or other Middle-eastern populations. Hence, the data presented in this blog posting is really a measure of the percentage of newborns that are either mulatto (black-white mix) or purely African ethnicity. France is becoming a brazil-like mulatto nation.
Abelard Lindsey,
no, sickle cell disease can affect both Northern African (Arab, Berber etc,) and Black Africans according to the French study quoted. And, inter alia, Indians.
For a detailed listing of the regions where the sickness is prevalent, see the listing of the risk groups at https://hailtoyou.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/neonatal-screening-for-sickle-cell-disease-in-france1.pdf , page 32, box 1
An article on this subject appears at the prominent racialist web-portal Alternative Right:
The Africanization of France
A German translation is now available at Politically Incorrect, the largest political blog in Germany: http://www.pi-news.net/2012/11/die-afrikanisierung-frankreichs/#more-291173
I find p. 133, table 1 of http://www.insee.fr/fr/ffc/docs_ffc/ref/IMMFRA12_g_Flot1_pop.pdf quite insightful. From this we learn that the share of newborns with white native French parents on both maternal and paternal side (“Deux parents ni immigrés ni descendants d’immigrés”) must be below 61% of the total. Below, because this number also includes minority populations such as blacks from the West Indies, gypsies etc. The remaining 39% constitute a mixture of everybody with everybody else (including babies with partly white French ancestry). I think this correlates quite adequately with ‘my’ figure of 31.5%, giving us a broad bracket of 30-40% of French newborns of (partly) foreign origin in mainlamd France.
Pingback: Anonymous
Update: Two month after initial publishment here and at Alternative Right, word is slowly spreading across the web:
Original article in English: http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/hbd-human-biodiversity/the-africanization-of-france/
German translation: http://www.pi-news.net/2012/11/die-afrikanisierung-frankreichs/
Dutch translation: http://ejbron.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/de-afrikanisering-van-frankrijk/
French postings:
http://www.fdesouche.com/116270-drepanocytose-et-recensements-ethniques
http://notrejournal.info/spip.php?page=article&id_article=296
http://islamversuseurope.blogspot.de/2012/12/shocking-new-proof-of-demographic.html
The article has been republished in four different languages:
English (orignal article): http://alternativeright.com/blog/2013/6/14/the-africanization-of-france
German translation: http://alternativeright.com/blog/2013/6/14/die-afrikanisierung-frankreichs
French translation: http://alternativeright.com/blog/2013/6/14/lafricanisation-de-la-france
Dutch translation: http://alternativeright.com/blog/2013/6/18/de-afrikanisering-van-frankrijk
Pingback: Metapolitical Dictionary | Radish
Pingback: Anonymous
Pingback: EU Election 2014: Racialist/Nationalist Sympathizers Gain Ground | Hail To You
I was curious if you ever considered changing the layout of your site?
Its very well written; I love what youve got to say.
But maybe you could a little more in the way of content so people could connect with it better.
Youve got an awful lot of text for only having 1 or two images.
Maybe you could space it out better?
There is an UPDATE on the latest figures to be found at http://www.eurocanadian.ca/2014/10/the-africanization-of-franceas-of-2014.html
Excerpt: “In 2000, 19 percent of all newborn babies in mainland France had at least one parent originating from beyond Europe, mainly African and the Orient: This share rose to 28.45 percent in 2007, to 31.5 percent in 2010, to 34.44 percent in 2012, and to 35.7 percent in 2013…In other words: within thirteen years, the number of (partly) extra-European babies has risen in mainland France from about one fifth to more than one third.”
Pingback: [World Cup 2018] France Squad: 33% European | Hail To You
this is not “diversity”, this is genocide of the native french