Is the current turmoil in France the fault of the French?

Apparently not.

In fact, everyone knows that this is a mess made by the Americans.

Why?

If it weren't for the wars started by the United States in the Middle East, how many refugees would have poured into Europe?

Of course, from another point of view, the French also deserve it.

Why?

At that time, when it launched a military strike on Libya to overthrow the Libyan regime, France was the most active, more active than the United States.

The war in Libya was the beginning of the war in the entire Middle East.

Interestingly, before the war in Libya was triggered, France was the first to improve relations with Libya, and even planned to sell the most advanced weapons and equipment to Libya, and the French president at that time was the first Western head of state to visit Libya, and the first to receive a visit from a Libyan leader.

Apparently, the French themselves opened Pandora's box.

What happened after that is no secret.

In fact, from an after-looking perspective, France was used by the Americans as a gunman to stand out for the United States in the Middle East, and finally caused a lot of trouble.

At the root, it is still the US authorities, or American interest groups, who are planning all this.

Why?

In the post-Cold War era, France and Germany have been actively promoting the short-term integration of Europe, and the division of labor is clear, France provides political and strategic security guarantees, Germany acts as the economic engine of Europe, and the two countries join hands to control the entire European continent and achieve the goal of hegemony in Europe through the European Union.

The question is, who would a strong Europe be a threat?

You know, the Soviet Union, which threatened the entire Western world, has disappeared, and the remaining countries such as Russia and Ukraine are not opponents of the EU at all.

In fact, many of the former Soviet republics actively sought membership of the European Union after independence.

At that time, if France and Germany were allowed to do so, the EU would not only actively expand eastward, but would also be very likely to form some kind of cooperative relationship with Russia.

Why?

On an economic level, France and Germany, especially Germany, are very close to Russia.

Even now, Germany has nearly half of its oil and gas supplied by Russia.

Imagine that if the European Union reconciles with Russia to form a powerful bloc across Eurasia, then what else is there for the United States?

And then what?

It was the fall of the World Trade Towers and the start of the global war on terror.

After more than a decade of brewing and fermentation, the refugee issue finally erupted with the war in Yemen, the civil war in Libya, the war in Syria, and the control of the Middle East by extremist groups.

First and foremost, the EU countries are the countries of the European Union.

It was not France that fell first, but Britain, and to be precise, the British were the first to react and make the decision to withdraw from the European Union.

In fact, the British have never seen themselves as Europeans.

During the period of the Empire, everything Britain did was to balance the powers of the European continent, first the First French Empire founded by Napoleon, then Tsarist Russia created by Peter the Great, and finally Germany under the Wilhelm family, and Germany controlled by the Nazis.

It can be seen that Britain has always been on the outside, using various ways to balance the continental powers.

Even during the Cold War, Britain's role was more in the North Atlantic, blocking the Red Empire's powerful fleet, especially the underwater fleet, so Britain was essentially closer to the United States, that is, using a more favorable geographical location to obtain the most favorable strategic environment.

From this point of view, the UK's exit from the EU is not a strange thing.

During the Cold War, Britain could gain more benefits by gaining access to the markets of continental European countries through the European Union, but after the end of the Cold War, especially when the refugee crisis broke out, Britain did not get benefits, but many refugees with visas from other EU countries.

So, does the UK need refugees?

From the perspective of national development, countries on the European continent such as France and Germany are actually considering the labor shortage of their own countries when accepting refugees.

What about the UK?

Apparently this problem does not exist.

Why?

Compared to France and Germany and other continental European countries, Britain's demographics are actually much better, and Britain was originally the world's largest colonial overlord.

In other words, Britain can absorb immigrants from its former colonial countries, the so-called Commonwealth countries.

Immigrants from Australia, Canada, India and other countries have largely allowed the UK to maintain a relatively desirable demographic structure.

Clearly, the UK does not need to absorb refugees to fill the labour gap in the country.

In fact, the disagreement over the refugee issue was the key, if not the main factor, for many Britons in their support for Brexit.

Of course, Britain can walk away, but what about France and Germany?

Interestingly, after Brexit, the leftists in France have gained more support, as it seems that most French people are controlled by idealistic sentiments, believing that Brexit is a despicable and shameless act, and that the noble French should go against it.

Of course, not only in France, but also in Germany.

In the immediate aftermath of Brexit, the left-wing parties in France and Germany won elections, while the right-wing parties that tried to change the situation lost.

Although some problems were exposed in the general election, such as the resistance of left-wing parties in Germany and the emergence of nationwide protests in France, this did not fundamentally change the political orientation of France and Germany, let alone correct the increasingly biased immigration policy.

The next few years changed almost everything.

Why?

In the years since, France has received at least 5 million refugees, in addition to about the same number of illegal immigrants, according to civil society statistics.

What is this concept?

In the more than a decade after 911, France received less than 5 million refugees in total, and the number of illegal immigrants was severely limited.

It can be seen that in the past few years, the demographic structure of France has almost completely changed.

To put it more bluntly, it is difficult to return to the accumulation, and the tail is too big to fall.

Although the immigration problem in France, or the problem of ethnic structure, will erupt sooner or later, after all, the willingness to have children far exceeds that of traditional French, but after Brexit, if France can correct its immigration policy in time, at least it will not erupt so soon.

In the words of the traditional French, what is needed in France today is not reform, but revolution, a national revolution like a great revolution.

Why?

Let France become France of the French again, a pure European country, and let the whole of Europe be the Europe of the Europeans again.

If politicians are not willing to act, then it is up to the population to act!