As Venetians, we’re very familiar with the concept of Remigration, as from the middle of the 20th century we’ve suffered the migration of ethnically incompatible populations from the southern regions of Italy, as well as more recent migrations from outside of Europe. As evident in the electoral history of Venetia in recent decades, most Venetians are receptive to political platforms that emphasize the need to promote local ethnic identity, and the concept or Remigration as well.
However, the lack of political representation in state politics - ever since the annexation of Venetia by Italy in 1866 - has led us to consider non-political solutions, and this can apply even to the concept of Remigration.
The purpose of this article is to explore the feasibility and desirability of Remigration as a realistic and viable strategy, as well as contextualizing and broadening its meaning as a process that involves not only the movement of peoples driven by state power, but as a metapolitical template through which European identitarian movements can spearhead a New European Renaissance through the re-evaluation of every aspect of European existence under the imperative of securing a future for our descendants.
We will address common concerns and misconceptions about the process, demonstrating that Remigration, as a gradual and orderly process, can be achieved. Moreover, we will discuss how remigration can be pursued even without direct state support, through the development of parallel institutions.
Through this article, we seeks to bring this concept into the public debate and encourage a broader discussion on the future of ethnic European as such, instead of treating the issue as merely an economic or security issue.
Definitions and Context
Remigration, in the current political debate, refers to the organized return (forcible or promoted) of non-european inhabitants of European countries to their ancestral homelands, under the imperative of achieving ethnoracial coherence in the European Homelands.
In the current socio-political climate, characterized by increasing diversity and multiculturalism, Remigration has emerged as a counter-movement aimed at preserving the cultural and ethnoracial coherence of Europeans - a goal that is increasingly evident as necessary for the survival and prosperity of ethnic Europeans.
The idea of Remigration challenges the dogma that the prevailing trends of global migration and integration are inevitable or permanent, proposing instead a reversal in which non-European populations are encouraged or incentivized to return to their countries of origin.
The Feasibility of Remigration
Throughout history, large-scale migrations of peoples have occurred, reshaping the ethnic and cultural makeup of entire continents: from the Indo-European migrations of the Bronze Age, to the Migration Period in Late Antiquity, and from the Bantu Migrations in Africa to the peopling of the Americas by European settlers. More recent examples are the harrowing genocide of ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe after World War II, or the mass migration of Jews to Israel following the establishment of the state.
These historical precedents demonstrate that significant population shifts are possible and can be managed over time, and are often driven by socio-political changes and supported by proper logistical planning.
This is especially true in the contemporary world, where technological advancements and logistical innovations have made mass movements of people more feasible than ever before:
Modern transportation systems can facilitate rapid and efficient relocation over long distances;
Digital technologies and states’ administrative capabilities enable precise planning and coordination, ensuring that such movements can be organized with minimal disruption;
The existence of global supply chains and international networks further supports the capability to manage large-scale remigration efforts, ensuring that people can be moved relatively safely and effectively;
One of the defining characteristics of modern society is a high degree of mobility and rootlessness that makes people more willing to relocate for economic, educational or personal reasons already.
The idea that large scale migration can be managed by political power is already self-evident in the fact that European states and the European Union - under the control of occult interests - have already coordinated the mass migration of non-europeans to the European Homelands, and they are doing nothing to stop it.
If non-European populations have been incentivized or encouraged to move to Europe, they can be encouraged to move back - a transition that can occur gradually and without the need for coercion.
To summarize: the feasibility of Remigration is supported both by historical examples of large-scale population movements, as well as by modern technological and logistical capabilities, and by the inherent mobility of contemporary global economies.
The Desirability of Remigration
There are many benefits to Remigration for ethnic European populations, as well as for non-europeans and their countries of origin.
For ethnic Europeans, maintaining ethnoracial coherence fosters a sense of shared identity and common purpose, which can lead to stronger community bonds and social cohesion. It could also be an antidote to political polarization, offering a shared identity and “common good” that can increase the consensus across political sides, inverting the rising trend of political violence and executive paralysis.
Remigration, obviously, would help to preserve uniquely European cultural traditions, languages, and historical narratives, ensuring that the heritage of ethnic Europeans is maintained and passed down through generations, serving as a common reference for all political and cultural initiatives.
This cultural continuity is vital for fostering a sense of belonging and pride among Europeans, which can enhance overall societal stability and well-being. This is true not only “horizontally”, but also “vertically”, as a shared ethnoracial landscape inevitably fosters intergenerational solidarity, making sure that political decision-making has the interests of future generations in mind, ultimately promoting a more connected and purpose-driven society.
Remigration is also a necessary measure for the self-defense and preservation of ethnic Europeans: as demographic shifts and multicultural policies threaten to dilute the distinct identity of European populations, Remigration is the only strategy that can safeguard their existence. By ensuring that European nations remain predominantly inhabited by ethnic Europeans, this process aims to protect their cultural and genetic heritage from potential ethnocultural extinction. In this light, Remigration can be regarded as an act of self-preservation, akin to a community's natural right to defend its continued survival.
Finally, Remigration cannot be solely about the physical relocation of non-europeans, because the practical implementation of its actual goal - a culturally healthy European society - would force policy-makers to confront the other issues that plague European populations in the present, such as low fertility rates, family disintegration, social atomization, religious void.
Solving these issues would require a holistic approach that, in turn, would imply a moral and spiritual rebirth because of the relevance of such factors to the ethnoracial fabric of Europe - a concept that goes beyond mere economics, statistics, or physical security.
In other words, Remigration forces us Europeans to think of ourselves as Europeans, to think of all the issues that we are facing as threatening the collective ethnoracial survival, and to prioritize the revitalization of an European ethnoracial consciousness as a precondition for practical action.
For non-europeans, Remigration offers the same things as to us Europeans: a place in which they would no longer feel as uprooted strangers, a homeland in which they can put down roots and reconnect with their ethnocultural heritage.
For their home countries, the influx of “re-migrants” - most of which would be of a compatible ethnic stock and religion - could help promote economic development and growth.
A non-violent and gradual process
Remigration should be envisioned as a gradual, multigenerational process rather than a sudden upheaval and displacement.
This approach allows for the careful planning and implementation of policies that encourage non-European populations to return to their ancestral homelands over time. By first setting in motion pro-fertility demographic trends in the autoctonous European population and sustaining them, the process can unfold naturally and with minimal disruption. For example, measures such as economic incentives, voluntary repatriation programs or even economic agreements with destination countries can provide the necessary stimulus.
However, the discussion thus far implies that, at some point in the future, this Europe-wide project will have the leverage granted by political power. Considering the present-day political context, it’s a tall order.
We must, then, think of how Remigration can occur without the direct backing of political power.
Remigration Without State Support
To facilitate Remigration without relying on state support, it is crucial for identitarian movements to promote the development of institutions dedicated to supporting the ethnic interests of European natives. We are talking, in practice, about parallel institutions.
The purpose of any expressly ethnic parallel institution, in our context, is to provide a service to the ethnic European population that not provided by the state - either intentionally or because of incompetence/reduction of welfare - with the strategic goal of substituting a state that is becoming increasingly alien to ethnic Europeans with new institutions which would function outside the traditional state apparatus, creating networks of assistance that would reinforce intraethnic solidarity and thus identity.
Gaining influence in local politics is another strategic approach to advancing Remigration goals without state-level support. By lobbying and participating in local political processes, proponents of Remigration can help shape policies that create a favorable environment for the formation of ethnic European communities. This could involve advocating for local regulations and initiatives that support ethnic cohesion and subtly encourage non-European emigration on a local scale. Building a network of like-minded individuals that can influence local governments and community organizations can help to steer local policy in a direction that aligns with Remigration objectives.
Based on this approach, implementing negative incentives on a local scale can encourage non-European emigration and indirectly support the consolidation of ethnic European populations. This approach involves creating policies and conditions that make it less attractive or more difficult for non-European residents to remain in certain areas. Examples include reducing access to welfare benefits, employment opportunities, or other services. By making it more challenging for non-European populations to stay, these policies could gradually facilitate their departure and support the growth of ethnic European communities.
There are countless other ways to promote the goal of Remigration that can be employed alongside each other. However, a desirable intermediate strategic goal of these initiatives is the establishment of ethnic enclaves or intentional communities, which would act as safe havens for ethnic Europeans, particularly in times of economic instability or social upheaval - which by themselves could incentivize the formation of said enclaves. By creating self-sustaining communities with a shared ethnic identity, these enclaves would provide a stable base for cultural preservation and development.
Encouraging economic cooperation and social solidarity within ethnic European populations is vital for achieving long-term success. By fostering collaboration among community members, ethnic Europeans can build robust economic networks and support systems that enhance our collective well-being. This includes promoting local businesses, creating job opportunities, and providing mutual aid and support. Economic and social collaboration not only strengthens community ties but also helps to ensure that ethnic European enclaves are sustainable and capable of supporting their members in the face of external challenges.
Ethnic enclaves could also serve as models of successful ethnic community organization, demonstrating the benefits of ethnic cohesion and attracting further support for Remigration by their success. Their local nature is also an advantage, as it provides adaptability and flexibility: by trial and error, parallel projects united by a single purpose could refine and develop better methods of ethnic consolidation.
By providing essential services and a sense of community, these initiatives would help to gather support for remigration efforts and enhance the viability of ethnic European enclaves, achieving the goals of Remigration on a local scale, which can then be expanded as a model to the wider Europeans Homelands.
Case Studies: Orania and no-go-zones
One prominent example of a successful model for ethnic community creation is Orania in South Africa. Established in 1991, Orania is an Afrikaner-only town founded with the goal of preserving Afrikaner culture and promoting self-governance. The town operates independently from the broader South African political system, providing its residents with a space to maintain their cultural identity and create a supportive community environment. Orania’s success demonstrates how a concentrated effort to build and sustain an ethnically cohesive community can thrive even within a broader multi-ethnic nation. Its principles and practices - such as its local currency, the Ora - offer valuable insights into how similar models could be applied to support ethnic European remigration efforts.
On the other hand, we might be forced to learn and adapt from the success of the so-called no-go-zones, inhabited by non-european migrants. Despite their dubious legality, they offer a potential model of a non-state institution that has managed to contest state authority on a local scale and consolidate an expressly ethnic local culture.
Conclusion
Remigration, meaning the project of European ethnoracial survival, must be understood as more than just the repatriation of non-Europeans through political power by this or that nation-state.
A key component of any broader strategy for ethnic European revival is spreading a sense of ethnic consciousness that extends beyond national boundaries and is not based just on citizenship of this or that nation-state. This involves promoting awareness of shared ethnic heritage, history, and values among ethnic Europeans, which would serve as a foundation for the coordination between different European peoples irrespective of states’ boundaries.
Also, we must go beyond its focus on mere demographics: it must be intended as a European-wide movement of ethnoracial affirmation, aimed first of all at spreading a European ethnoracial consciousness, and secondly at using the latter as a guiding principle through which identitarian movements can provide solutions to the issues plaguing present-day Europe - including but not limited to the presence of non-europeans in the European Homelands.
The ongoing global crisis offers, through its destabilization of the post WWII order and of the concept of the nation-state, fertile ground from which new institutions have an opportunity to grow: as the traditional idea of citizenship weakens, alternative identities will begin to fill the void, ultimately ushering in a period in which power slips away from the nation-state and gravitates towards pre-modern forms.
Local communities, ethnic gangs, männerbünde, mercenary armies, religious sects, private magnates and charismatic personalities will become increasingly influential in the western world, as new modes of thinking and predisposition from the general population will empty the old institutions of any power they have left, real or imagined.
We must brave these uncertain waters and achieve our collective ethnic revival through a variety of means, as the attainment of political power is not opposed to the development of local influence through parallel institutions: instead, the two solutions complement each other.
The “full-spectrum” nature of our Struggle, then, will have to be reflected in the holistic nature of the solution, forcing us to re-evaluate every aspect of European existence: from the political to the economic, from the social to the religious.
The unification of various methods and aspects of life into a single vision will be reflected in its result: a New European Renaissance.
This is a weak argument. If you apply remigration outside of European borders, ancestral Europeans in the US, South America and especially Orania would have to remigrate back to Europe.
Often those populations are far removed from the current culture that dominates in Europe (e.g. Amish in the US as an extreme example). The historic case of Volga Germans going back to Germany post WWII is a case in point. They were more Russian than German at the time.
Remigration is a weak concept. The focus instead should be on more forceful assimilation of migrant populations (e.g. language requirements as a bare minimum, but also skills tests (perhaps along the lines of a points based system). Rather than doing this only at the point of entry, there should be regular follow ups with all members of the family (e.g. kids and accompanying spouses). There should be a case for 'failing assimilation standards' so that individuals and families who haven't sufficiently integrated need to pack bags.
I know this is probably against the whole premise of pure ethnoracial borders that some people are proponents of, but migration, as you point out, has existed forever and nations/regions need to adapt to this. Without migration many European countries would have rapidly shrinking populations (see Russia), so it's just no realistic or feasible to do away with migration if you look at it from a pragmatic perspective.
Lastly, heavy assimilation has the support of many more of the population therefore it is actually politically feasible. Remigration is not.