A study was carried out among those who had been allocated social housing in the Ile-de-France (Greater Paris) region between 2009 and 2010.

A majority of the persons interviewed were born abroad (79.7%) and mainly in sub-Saharan Africa (77.9%).

Source: Fdesouche.com

Sub-Saharan Africans were 77.9% of the foreigners and North Africans were 13.9%. So, in total, Africans accounted for more than 90% of all the social housing allocated to foreigners, which itself was approximately 80% of the whole.

[Editor’s Note: The study was carried out by the Ile de France branch of the National Federations of Associations for Welcoming and Social Readjustment (FNARS).]

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • The french taxpayers are paying blacks to breed. To be forced to pay for the destruction of your society is horrible.

  • And the socialists tell us we need all these third worlders to help support an “aging white population”, but the reality is whites are supporting young non-whites while they do nothing but breed and complain how bad they have it.

    • Oil Can Harry

      Whenever I hear that we need Third World immigrants to pay for Social Security for the elderly I ask how the invaders will be doing that while in jail or on welfare.  

    • I W

      While Whites have fewer children later in life thanks (in large part) to the tax burden of supporting the imported third world.

    • KenelmDigby

      Also, remember that France and the EU has a whole has massive youth unemployment, of the order of 25% or greater.
       The ‘argument’ that there aren’t enough of young workers to support the elderly is pure nonsense.

  • And yet they still find cause to burn down the city.
    Personally, I view the presence of blacks in paris as a crime against civilization.

  • How could any country look at the saga of blacks in America  and still think importing them into their country is a good idea?  Haven’t they seen Detroit or any of the other black infested cities here that resemble war zones?

    • No

      Well . . . like in just about everything, the answer lies in history.  At the start of the 20th century, French birth rates were abysmally low.  Less births meant less boots on the ground during war.  That was one reason why the French allied with Russia – Russia had the manpower to fight the Germans.   That alliance triggered WWI.

      Then they lost almost an entire generation during the war – about 1,700,000 people.  They lost another 500,000 during WW2.  Basically, the French population DID NOT GROW between the end of the Franco-Prussian War (1871) and 1945.  It hovered around 40 million.

      Birth rates started to increase in the late 1940s.   At the same time, France’s overseas colonies were fast declaring independence . . . so the answer seemed obvious;  Import pied noirs (French in Algeria), the French in Indo-China and the French in Africa.  Bring everybody home to run the industries.  And while we’re making it easier for people to come in, we may as well let some blacks from our former colonies too.

      Interestingly, this is the same reason why there are so many blacks in northern American cities.  During WWI, industry in the cities expanded and there was a demand for labor.  At the same time, German submarine warfare stopped the flow of European immigrants. 

      The solution?  Import blacks from the South.  They were happy to go since  unemployment was high and the white man was riding them like a pony.

      Yankees were much easier for blacks to deal with than unreconstructed Southerners.

      • Were German U-Boat captains so foolish as to attack ships heading TOWARDS America? That seems to be a wasteful ejection of torpedoes, stealth, and common sense.

        I suspect that by the time WWI started, there were few Europeans left who had to emigrate. The aftermath of the war brought another wave from Germany and a huge wave from Russia, but otherwise Europe had no people left in such need of a second chance.

        • No

          It’s not really an issue of them shooting at ships heading east or west.  The issue was that with unrestricted torpedo attacks on all shipping, the trans-Atlantic trade stopped . . . except for convoys.  Shipping lines also diverted shipping to war-time requirements. 

          What I described is a matter of fact.  The black movement north actually has a name:  The Great Migration.  It had various causes, but increased industrialization  in the north during WWI – and lack of immigrants – is recognized as a major factor.

          No, emigration had not stopped prior to WWI.  In fact, it was doing just the opposite.  If you look at gov records, what you’ll see is that from 1900-1913, immigration had sky-rocketted and it was well over one million a year for several of those years.  Then from 1914-1919 it shrinks to a small percentage (most from other places besides Europe).  Then it picks up again in the 1920s.

          • The_Bobster

            Immigration was vitually brought to a halt by the Immigration Act of 1924. This was followed by almost three decades of prosperity after the Depression. Then the Immigration Act of 1965 was passed……

          •  Well there was also the factor that war brought an instant increase in job opportunities for many in Europe… as Hitler is testimony to.

            My family (much of it) were indeed part of the post-WWI exodus from Germany. Like many from Russia, they did not recognize their country without their Emperor and feared the consequences of life under a leftist regime.

            Like many emigres from that period, they had enough money still to continue their previous life as farmers, however.

  • Just seeing the words” black African in Europe” used in the same sentence seems so wrong and aberrant. Only the most evil of those among us would perpetrate this upon our White race.

  • KenelmDigby

    The only rational ‘explanation’ for mass third world immigration into France is that it, supposedly, is beneficial to the economy – lefties, immigrationists, the WSJ, ‘The Economist’ all manner of th elitists and the so-called ‘great and good’ keep repeating this mantra ad nauseum, parrotting it day and night, incessantly as if it was a great piece of revealed wisdom.
     However, the plain truth is very different. The fact is that anyone who lives in state provided housing is a drain on the taxpayer – and most probably a very big drain since housing is an expensive commodity, requiring heavy state investment.
     All other ‘justifications’ for mass third world immigration such as ‘vibrancy’ and ‘diversity’ are merely trash, and shouldn’t even be considered by thinking persons.

  • JackKrak

    “Yeah, hi – is this the Japanese Embassy? Great. Listen, I’d like to ask what forms I need to fill out in order to emmigrate to Japan. No, I don’t have a job. School? Uh…..yeah, I went for a couple of years but I will need someone to fill out the application for me or you could just publish it in my language – but even then I will probably not manage too well. Oh, and I don’t really plan on working when I get there – is that cool? I hear you’ve got a very rich country & I’m sure you generously fund parts of the government that welcome people like me who enrich your lives with the diversity that I bring to your dull country. Why are you laughing? Anyway, what kind of house will I get? And did I mention I want to bring three sisters, four cousins and my mother in law? Yeah, so please make sure the house is big enough for all us and …….hello?……….hello???? Damn – where’s that number for the French Embassy?”