Renaud Camus, the 78-year-old French author, is now persona non grata in the UK. His crime? Thinking thoughts deemed unpalatable by Keir Starmer’s government. Starmer, who so proudly proclaimed in The White House that free speech thrives under the Union Jack, has banned a man from entering the country because of his ideas.
This is in stark contrast to the tens of thousands of migrants who illegally gain access to British shores, even when they harbour views that are directly hostile to British democracy.
Welcome to neo-authoritarian Europe, where a European writer is more dangerous than radical Islamists.
The Man and the Myth
Who is this Renaud Camus who is apparently so dangerous that he is banned from travelling?
If you believe the media, Camus is a racist conspiracy theorist whose idea of “The Great Replacement” has inspired far-right groups. It’s a simple tale, created for fragile souls seeking safe answers and confirmation of prejudices.
The truth, however, is far more nuanced and far less convenient for the ruling class of our time.
Camus is neither racist nor right-wing, but a gay, atheist intellectual who has observed something deeply disturbing: the systematic dismantling of European culture, orchestrated by elites across politics, business, churches, universities and media.
According to connoisseur Rod Dreher, Camus’ central claim is not that a Jewish or pro-Islamic conspiracy is replacing white Europeans. No, his analysis is far more sophisticated:
Since World War II, European elites have embarked on a mission of cultural self-denial in which Europeans must learn to despise and then reject their own history and civilisational achievements.
The liberal-progressive elites believe that European civilisation is fundamentally evil (racist, colonialist, misogynist, Islamophobic, you name it…). Capitalists and globalists believe that backward citizens with national self-awareness are too stupid to realise the benefits of mass immigration, which globalists consider necessary for free trade. And sentimental churchmen believe that nationalism contradicts the universalism of Christianity.
Camus emphasises that a people who know and value their history, literature and culture will not allow themselves to be replaced by people who do not share that heritage or who despise it.
Camus emphasises that immigrants can become good Frenchmen through active assimilation and acceptance of France’s “grand narrative”. His definition of a people is based on culture and shared narratives.
As he precisely puts it: “People can always join a people out of love for its language, its literature, its lifestyle or its landscapes.” But of course, a foreign people who reject assimilation cannot join a host people. “They can only conquer them, flood them, replace them.”
Camus fears not the individual immigrant, but the cultural self-abandonment of Europeans that renders any assimilation meaningless. For what is the immigrant to be assimilated into if the native culture has already capitulated?
The curse of authoritarian liberalism
Camus’ travel ban is not an isolated incident, but a symptom of a deeper sickness in our own system: authoritarian liberalism.
The self-appointed champions of freedom and tolerance have become the new authoritarians. With their intellectual laziness and hostility to dissent, the false champions of freedom represent a real threat to our democratic foundations.
The Camus case perfectly illustrates this trend. The elites consider themselves enlightened, but show remarkably little interest in understanding what Camus actually writes. Their obsession with misinformation becomes a tool to shut down debates before they even begin.
While European elites rage against Vance for criticising them for curtailing free speech, and while they thunder against Trump for dismantling the rule of law, they themselves are busy undermining democracy, not just in the UK, but most recently in France, Romania and Germany. As The Economist has shown, the fight against free speech is so effective that only 40 per cent of Germans believe they can speak freely. That’s a halving since 1990!
Now the German government also wants to ban “lies”. Is Camus’ idea of “The Great Replacement” a lie? Of course not, but it is a very important idea that can – and should – be discussed.
The abuse of power confirms the critics
The most ironic thing about the travel ban on Camus is that it almost guarantees the spread of his ideas.
This is the eternal blindness of authoritarian liberalism: they can’t see that their abuse of power confirms the critics’ analyses. By banning Camus, they prove his point about the elite’s fear of confronting real-life problems.
In the end, it is democracy itself that loses out.
Camus holds a mirror up to the European elite, showing them their own fears and doubts. And nothing is more threatening to authoritarian minds – even those who call themselves liberal – than being confronted with their own hypocrisy.