Geographically, France lies in Europe but, as new data indicate, demographically our neighboring country is drifting further toward Africa. France, different from the US, doesn’t do censuses from which ethnic affiliation can be extracted, rather they instead follow their ideal of a color-blind republic. This policy doesn’t change the ethnic reality in the country one iota, but it definitely has the effect of keeping the French citizens in the dark about the matter.

(By Falko Baumgartner, appeared in original on

Only few official statistics exist regarding the extent of the immigrant population and indigenous French – until now. Useful numerical data is coming from an unexpected source, medical science, and it allows us to take an adequate and objective look at the strong growth of the non-white population in France.

Since 2000, France has been carrying out nationwide systematic examinations among newborns for sickle-cell anemia (SCA). SCA is an inherited disease that appears overwhelmingly only among non-European people. However, because of the immigration from the Third World it has developed into the most commonly occurring genetic illness in modern France. In order to ensure an early medical treatment of SCA, the French health authorities determined risk groups in population that undergo a test shortly after birth. These groups consist primarily of newborns of African origin, North Africa, Black Africa as well as ethnic Africans from the American continent. Another risk group encompasses people with immigrant background from the Near and Middle East (Turkey, the Arab peninsula and the Arab countries that lie between them) and the Indian subcontinent. The rest is compiled from immigrants from a relatively small coastal area in southern Europe, namely Portugal, southern Italy, Greece and the islands of Corsica and Sicily.

Newborn babies are seen as high-risk in France if “at least one of the parents comes from one of the regions of risk” where the gene responsible for SCA is spread. This national test program, based on the ethnic origin of the parents, allows us to comprehend the full scope of the quick growth of the non-white population in France:

In the year 2000, 19 percent of all newborn children in metropolitan France, the French sovereign area in Europe, had at least one parent who came from the above-mentioned risk areas. This number grew by 31.5 percent to 28.45 percent in 2007 and 28.45 percent in 2010, which when expressed in absolute numbers, comprises 253,466 of the 805,958 babies born. In other words: in less than a decade, the number of (partly) non-European newborns climbed from roughly a fifth to a third.

The medical examinations also disclose another set of data, namely the precise breakdown according to region (see map below). Thus, we come to find out that, in 2010, 60 percent of all newborns on the Île de France, which in practice corresponds to Paris, were born to non-Europeans. In Provence-Alpe du Sud, where Le Pen’s National Front is especially strong, the non-white portion came to 43.2 percent; in neighboring Languedoc-Roussillon, 41.6 percent. The least amount was found in Bretagne, 5.5 percent. In each of the 22 metropolitan regions of France, the percentage of immigrant babies grew between 2007 and 2010.

Examination of newborn babies for sickle-cell anemia in European France; the values are reported by region and in percentages of the total number of newborn children in each year. Since this genetic illness is mainly limited to non-Europeans, above all Africans, the numbers allow us to deduce the ethnic origin of the newborns. (J. Bardakdjian-Michau, M. Roussey: “Le dépistage néonatal de la drépanocytose en France (The neonatal screening of the sickle-cell disease in France)”, July 2012, Number 27-28, Page 315, Image 3; for the complete source, see the end of the article)

What can argue with the accuracy of these numbers? Not much, in all appearances, they are watertight. The authors of this study even pointed out that the test for sickle-cell anemia was not carried out for all newborns, but they consider the excluded cases to be “relatively rare.” A recording of these cases couldn’t logically reduce the relative portion of the non-white babies anyway, rather in contrast, only further increase it. With this, the southern European immigrants who haven’t been accounted for separately in the statistics remain the unknown value in the equation. How great is their part in the risk group studied? Must we correct the number of non-white babies significantly downward in order to take into account their portion of population in the risk group? I would argue that by far there isn’t enough to blur the trend: millions of French, according to estimates, actually come from Italians, but most had already settled generations ago in the country. The examination program, in my understanding, is used only among babies whose father and/or mother has settled from one of the risk zones and covers only the immigration that has taken place in recent times.

The authors of the cited medical study themselves leave no doubt as to what they considered their main reason for the increasing spread of sickle-cell anemia. They lead it directly back to the increase of immigration from Africa, or in their words “as a result of the population increase in African-Caribbean regions of overseas France, and now the immigration essentially from North Africa and Africa south of the Sahara into metropolitan France.”

Now my worry here is not the spread of the sickle-cell disease as such, rather the strong demographic downturn of white France that these numbers reflect, and the current multiculturalistic climate in Europe, which forbids speaking about such developments at all.

As a political scientist, I look with jealously on how medical personnel, biochemists and geneticists of this study – who are apparently completely in the dark about the overwhelming implications of their study results – can speak freely and unencumbered by the demands of political correctness about a process that truly presents nothing less than the greatest demographic shift of France since the Frankish conquest and the founding of the French nation itself.

It’s astonishing: One only has to substitute their discussion of “babies tested” with “African-Oriental newborns,” take a look at the map of the test population provided, and then one receives a pretty complete picture of that which enlightened France has categorically refused to share with its citizens: that white France, the true France, the France that made France is recognized as disappearing and clearing its place for a hybrid Euro-African society. La Grand Nation has apparently slain itself through mass immigration. It can even be argued that this wave of immigration possesses diminishing marginal utility for the immigrants themselves: the more white France disappears, the less the country keeps its character that took all these immigrants in in the first place.

While I stated this fully and completely, this wasn’t completely correct. In reality, the demographic condition of white France is still even worse for two reasons: First, the discussion still hasn’t affected the overseas departments that have always been the homestead for an ethnically mixed population. Their newborn children, as the study says, are being subjected in their entirety to the test for SCA. By including their numbers, 38,575 babies in the year 2010, the percentage of non-white births increases from 31.5 percent for Metropolitan France to 34.6 percent for all of France (292,041 of 844,533 newborns). Second, we can’t forget that the tests don’t cover all of those immigrants from without Europe that don’t possess any genetic disposition for sickle-cell anemia, namely East Asians or Latin Americans. Taking additional consideration of their birth rates, the percentage of white French is reduced further to an unknown value.

The bitter irony is that this population shift demonstrates that France has been more radically altered through its former colonies than France itself ever changed them. In contrast to its maritime counterparty Great Britain, France was never a successful colonizer. Its only colony of significance still existing is Canadian Québec where it sent no more than 10,000 settlers. In case there would be a “revenge of the colonies” as the left-leaning “white man’s guilt” trip promotes and demands, France has certainly gotten more than its fair share back.

France has always understood itself as defender of “culture-neutral,” republican values in the whole world. The historical service of the country in the spread of enlightened ideas around the globe is indisputable. But it’s flagship role has blinded it to the negative retroactivity going on in its own country: France has never properly understood that the total propagation of these ideals have also led to the cultural and ethnical evisceration of the citoyen, that it’s own roots would be robbed and their right to possess it would be disputed. It has never really comprehended that a strong feeling of one’s own cultural and ethnic identity is not the enemy of democratic values, but much more rather it’s necessary and natural counterpart. It has forgotten that the French Revolution, a gift to the democratic world, was not created in an ethnic and cultural vacuum, rather from people with an identity and history – a white European identity.

Therefore, it can’t be any coincidence that France belongs to one of the first Western countries that will be the demographic victim of its own negation of culture and people. In its own way, history has returned to it’s place of origin: What France originally exported as an idea, the radically culture-blind republic, is making the country defenseless against its own rapid de-Europeanization – the Revolution is consuming its children, forever.


J. Bardakdjian-Michau, M. Bahuau, D. Hurtrel, et al.: “Neonatal screening for sickle cell disease in France”, in: Journal of Clinical Pathology, January 2009, Vol. 62, No. 1, Pages 31-33 (, also

J. Bardakdjian-Michau, M. Roussey: “Le dépistage néonatal de la drépanocytose en France” (Newborn screening for sickle cell disease in France), in: Bulletin épidémiologique hebdomadaire: “La drépanocytose en France: des données épidémiologiques pour améliorer la prise en charge” (Sickle cell disease in France: epidemiological data to improve health care management), July 2012, No. 27-28, Pages 313-317 (

Posted by PI / Translation: Anders Denken

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • email
  • Google Buzz