Belgian MEP is Reprimanded for Mentioning the ‘Great Replacement’ of Europe’s Population

An MEP from Belgium, Tom Vandendriessche, has spoken out about the Muslim migrant menace: “Belgian MEP reprimanded by EU chiefs for calling mass migration policy ‘organized repopulation’ of native Europeans,” by Thomas Brooke, Remix News, February 20, 2024:

“These are [EU Commissioner Ylva Johansson]’s literal words: ‘We need migration’,” Vandendriessche said of the comments on Jan. 16.

“She wants to bring an additional 1 million migrants to Europe, on top of the many millions we already have.

ADVERTISEMENT

“In doing so, she wants to combat the aging of Europe’s shrinking population. So she literally wants non-European peoples to replace shrinking European peoples.

“That is, by definition, replacement migration, a synonym for repopulation,” the Belgian MEP added.

Having noted the decline in Europe’s indigenous population, and the need to replace it by at least “one million immigrants” a year, Johansson says nothing about alternatives. For example, she failed to consider how the peoples of Europe could adopt pro-natalist policies to increase the indigenous populations in their countries. For example, European governments could provide much longer paid maternity and even paternity leaves, free creches for infants and toddlers, for infants, and provide great increases in family allowances for every child after the first two. These benefits would only be made available to families whose members have been citizens of the country for at least two generations. This would prevent recent immigrants — i.e. Muslims — from taking advantage of this government program meant only to raise the birth rate of the native population.

Vandendriessche’s interpretation of the commissioner’s remarks was met with scathing criticism from left-wing members of the European Parliament, including Dutch MEP Sophie in ‘t Veld, who accused him of using “Nazi terminology.”

There was not any “Nazi terminology” in what Vandendriessche said. He did not call for hurting, much less killing, anyone. He simply raised an objection to Johansson’s call for at least another one million migrants to be admitted to Europe every year, without her specifying which immigrants, from which places, would be more likely to fit in. After all, it should not be beyond the wit of European countries to put in place programs to attract immigrants who are able to integrate easily into their new homes. The most obvious source of such immigrants is Central and South America. For example, over the last few years millions of Venezuelans have been fleeing the collapsing economy that the Marxists Chavez and his successor Maduro created, turning one of the richest countries in South America into one of the poorest. These Venezuelans, who have been trying to cross into Texas could, all by themselves, provide the “one million migrants” whom Ylva Johansson said were needed in Europe. Another source of immigrants would be the Philippines; Filipinas are now to be found all over Italy, working as “badantes” — that is, caregivers for the elderly. More of them could be similarly employed elsewhere in Europe.

The Flemish politician was subsequently investigated by the parliament for alleged hate speech, an investigation that has now been concluded and resulted in a reprimand by Metsola, the parliament head.

“It is not the first time that your use of this expression has raised a point of order in a plenary session,” the European Parliament president wrote in a letter to Vandendriessche on Feb. 8. “The use of this kind of language, with its connotations of the darkest times in European history, is unacceptable.

“Members of the European Parliament must always take into account the impression their speeches make on citizens and the emotions they can stir. We bear a great responsibility when we take the floor, to preserve the reputation of the European Parliament.

“We owe it to our citizens and to this House to behave in a respectful and dignified manner. Therefore, I ask you to refrain from making such statements in the future,” she concluded….

I don’t find Vandendriessche’s remark the least bit redolent of the Nazis. Nor do I find that it violates the need to speak, as Metsola, the head of the European Parliament said, “in a respectful and dignified manner.” There is a “Great Replacement” going on, and it will continue until enough people realize it is not inevitable, and that there are choices that Europeans can make to ensure that non-Muslim migrants are admitted while Muslim would-be migrants are kept out. This policy does not reflect a blind “islamophobia,” but is based on Europe’s unhappy experience with Muslim migrants since the beginning of the century. In another speech, an unchastened Vandendriessche should clear things up, explaining that he is not against all immigrants, that he welcomes those who have a reasonable chance of integrating into Europe, but he does not want Europeans to continue to admit into their midst those who are irredeemably hostile to non-Muslims, when there are many other sources of immigrants who do not bear such animus.