I just saw the Daily Mail piece on Mr. Moutaux, right after writing the article and write before I was about to publish it. It seems pretty darn credible, and the pictures are especially evocative. After reading it this guy seems like a pretty legit, and pretty impressive, Identitarian. In one picture he even rocks a Richard Spencer haircut for goodness sake, and his views seem a pretty close approximation of general ‘Alt-Right’ principles. The Daily Mail article also suggests that his targets did not include railways and bridges, but rather more formal representations and offices of the French government, which is exactly what I reference in the article below as being more effective targets of 4GW direct action. This suggests that the attacks might have been much more well-planned from a strategic perspective than how I evaluated them below. I am also embedding pictures from the Daily Mail article at the bottom in case anyone has not seen them yet.
Here is the article as I wrote it this morning, June 7th, 2016:
News reports came out yesterday that the Ukrainian government had arrested a 25 year old native White Frenchman with a treasure trove of guns, ammunition, and explosives which he was trying to transport back to France. The articles quoted the Ukrainian authorities as stating that this individual – Gregoire Moutaux- was part of the ‘far-right” and was unhappy with his government’s immigration policies, along with various aspects of globalization, etc.
There has been a lot of speculation that this story is made up, which I think is very appropriate. The current Ukrainian government deserves at least a couple of echo brackets around it’s name, and if there was any Eastern European government that would shape news to try to help the Angela Merkel’s of the world, Ukraine’s would be it.
Also, news reports indicate that there was another gentleman in the passenger’s seat who was wrestled to the ground and also arrested. I think this is slightly more suggestive of arms smuggling than right-wing ‘terrorism’, as arms smugglers would be more likely to work in teams than Nationalist terrorists, as the latter seems- to me at least- to be something that will predominantly be an individual phenomenon, at least in its early incarnations.
For the sake of argument however, I am going to analyze the potential effectiveness of this individual’s supposed plans, and attempt to grade it from a 4GW perspective, just as I attempted to grade the actions of Anders Behring Breivak and Dylan Roof in an article for Counter-Currents last year (which you can read here).
The articles that I have read suggest that Mr. Moutaux planned on blowing up railways, bridges, stadiums, Mosques, and Synagogues. If that was the case, I would give such a plan the following grades in the following areas:
1. Inhabiting the “David” space and making one’s opponents look like the ‘Goliath” (the overlapping Strategic-Moral box of war)-
I think such actions would for the most part have been a failure on this front. Attacking things such as railways and bridges is effective for Islamist terrorists because those are symbols of the land they are trying to conquer, but for White Identitarians, those are symbols of the land that they are seeking to defend, and thus attacking them does not propagate any positive narrative or symbolism. Also, as I have written about the (possible) actions of the so-called “Freital group” (who also could have been made up), attacking mosques and migrants is, in most scenarios (see below for exceptions) going to situate the Identitarian 4GW agent in the “Goliath” box, rather than the “David” one. Therefore these (possible) plans would get an F in this regard.
2. Forcing the government to act in explicitly “Anti-White” ways-
Had these attacks been planned out I am sure the French government, and all European governments, would have cracked down on “Right-Wing terrorists” to an extreme degree. However, the fact that many native White Europeans would have been killed in such attacks would have caused them to separate “Right-wing terrorism” from “White Europans” in general. This does not have to be the case at all, but such is the problem when targets of direct 4GW action are picked poorly. Therefore these supposed attacks would- in my mind- have registered a D or F in this regard.
3. Highlighting to fellow Frenchman their interests are no longer being served by the state-
These potential attacks would have registered an F in this area. They would have situated French identity and sympathy firmly with the government, rather than against it.
4. Delegitimizing the French government by showing that it cannot protect its citizens-
Such potential attacks would have been effective in this arena if you want to analyze the arena strictly by itself, but this would have been vastly overshadowed by the problems in the other areas.
5. Educating the French populace to the existential threat facing them with radical Islam and helping them awake from the religion of White-self hatred/Cultural-Marxism/Suicidalism-
This is hard to ascertain, as it would have depended on other factors we cannot know. If the attacker had left a well-written manifesto, etc, it might have been the case, but even that would have been contradicted in this regard by the fact that the attacks would have killed many native White Europeans.
6. Exacerbating tensions between rival societal groups (specifically Muslims and Whites) –
Attacking Mosques could have been successful in this regard, but this would have been negated by the fact that so many other targets would have had nothing to do with Islam or immigrants and instead have been representations of the attackers own homeland. Again, too confusing.
However, I wish to reiterate again that the above analysis is based only on the official statements of the Ukrainian government, which are probably complete lies, whether 100% made up or just fabricated in terms of Mr. Moutaux’s intended targets.
Either way, I will below outline what I think would have been/what would be more effective targets from a 4GW perspective.
Disclaimer: I am not in the least bit encouraging anyone to engage in such actions, this is just a third party analysis of what would have been more effective (yet still highly illegal). It is no different than if I was analyzing what sort of actions would be more effective from a 4GW standpoint in relation to FARC Guerillas in Colombia or the Uyghur Muslims in China. This site does not advocate illegal actions in any capacity nor does it support violence against European governments, as that would be illegal.
With all that being said, the following targets would have been more effective.
1. Government buildings
By targeting government buildings, a 4GW direct actor would be highlighting a separation between the “government” and “the people”. This would educate regular French people to the fact that some within their same identity group believe the government to be the enemy. It would also have situated the 4GW actor within the “David” box, as governments are prime “Goliath” symbols. Furthermore it would have caused the French government to crack down hard against Identitarian Whites, which would have further placed them into the “Goliath” box and delegitimized them that much more to the native French people.
2. Government employees, politicians, etc
This is the same thing, as long as those targeted are being selected in a manner congruent with the honor group from which the 4GW actor comes from. That was the big problem with Breivik that we have discussed before, in that Northern European honor codes dictate that it is wrong to kill women and children (or teenagers in his case), thus invalidating his actions from a Nordic honor-code perspective and vastly reducing any positive 4GW impacts they might have had. As I have stated before, if Anders Behring Breivak had only killed adult male members of ethno-suicidal political parties, he might be viewed far differently.
3. Mosques representing extreme Salafi ideology
As stated in the above article, most attacks on Mosques or migrant centers will always place the Identitarian actor in the Goliath box, which is anathema to 4GW strategy. The only exceptions would be when the migrants being attacked are known gang-rapists or terrorists, or when the Mosques being attacked are representations of terrorism, as hardcore Salafi Mosques with a history of proximity to terrorism and a history of hate-preaching would be. The underlying narrative to such an action would be “We are defending our French homeland from Radical Islam since our government is unwilling or unable to do so”- further delegitimizing the government vis a vis native French citizens.
4. Pro-migrant organizations-
This would be effective in a manner that was not discussed above, but is still important, which would be dissuading native Frenchman from acting in concert with the enemy. It would be firmly stating: “Those who work to bring in migrants are traitors” and exerting pressure upon such traitorous individuals to cease engaging in those activities.
5. Turkish and Saudi Arabian embassies
The targeting of such entities would exacerbate tensions between Muslims and Whites, further destabilizing the country and the government which is in line with Identitarian objectives. Furthermore, the underlying narrative would have been effective as well: “We are defending our French homeland against foreign Muslim influence and attack because the French government is unable and unwilling to do so.”
Regardless of what would have been the targets of these supposed planned attacks (if they are indeed true), we can take hope in the fact that more native Europeans are waking up to the reality that their countries are at war. I would like to think that for every Mr. Moutaux who gets arrested planning direct action like this, there are a thousand other native Europeans who are quietly training with weapons, learning paramilitary strategy, and waiting for the day when it is time to rise up. I know that is what I am trying to do, and the course I am encouraging any and all who read this to undertake.