[Menydh]

I would have appreciated your own opinion on the whole discussed issue, since you profile yourself as an Identitarian.

Originally Posted by Eurovox

Faye reply to that objection in these terms: «L’Eurosibérie devra être fondée sur le principe de «séparation des peuples». Chacun chez soi, et en bonne entente de voisinage, si possible.

Please, try to post it in English next time. I hate to pretend that I understand French.

"Euro-Siberia will have to be founded upon the principle of 'separation of peoples'. To each its own, and in a good neighbour arrangement if possible ...

À chaque groupe de peuples son propre modèle économique, politique, ethnique.»

To each group of people its own economic, political and ethnic model."

This is much contradictory with his previous statement of an ethnically homogenous [European].

Perhaps he is having problems to define Europe?

First of I would like to invite all people who have some doubts about the ethnical constitution of Siberia population to visit Wikipedia here.

I doubt that that's needed at all.

As for Mynnyd remarks, well, please try to visit Athenaeum webpage and there you will find this article of great interest, in my opinion of course, and where Faye explain quiet well his views about Eurosiberia.

Actually, I've found another article which I find particularly interesting to this discussion, as it was something that I intended to argue from the start:

Euro-Russia in the Context of World War IV, by Palev Tulaev

Let me quote some text:

Russia is much more than a country. It was called Holy Russia, Moscow Kingdom, Russian Empire, Soviet Union, and in spite of all the changes, it still possesses some special essence. Her White body is living in the heavens, guarding the memory and the spirit of our race.

Located in the center of the Eurasian continent, Russia was, is and always will be the biggest European country, protecting the West from Mongol-Tatars and Turkish nomads. Formally you may call it post-European, like the USA, because we are the legatees of white colonizers and culture-bearers. But through our race, language, roots and civilization, we are Europeans in spite of all the dramas of the 20th century.

Native Russians make up the main body of our big nation, the nucleus and the spine of our state. If not for the Russians, the whole of Eurasia and Siberia would had been conquered by Chinese or Muslim tribes. Russia is still the center of White resistance in the Caucasus and the Far East.

That's why I propose to rename Guillaume Faye's project of "Eurosiberia" into "Euro-Russia". In this way, the real historical and juridical subject (Russia) is not substituted by the geographic space called "Siberia". From a geopolitical point of view, we come to the ethno-political one.

Although not in the same direction, this is a reaction that I would have expected from Russians.

Let me insist in what I said earlier:

Originally Posted by Mynydd

Siberia belongs to Russia and it is only a part of Europe so long as it belongs to Russia. This is so obvious and simple, that it is almost stupid to mention it. Almost. How it is a part of Europe it depends on how one defines Europe. And it is there where I believe that the Identitarian movement starts building on non-solid foundations. A solid foundation is one made of reality, not of myth.