The British Government recently barred French writer Renaud Camus from entering the UK.

His crime?

Not actual incitement, not violence, not lawbreaking, but a controversial idea.

Camus, originator of the ‘Great Replacement’ theory, was scheduled to speak at a Big Remigration Conference organised by the Homeland Party, as well as at the Oxford Union. His Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) had been approved. Then, abruptly, it was revoked. The Home Office declared that his visit was “not conducive to the public good”.

Meanwhile, Julius Malema, a South African political figure who openly sings “Kill the Boer” at rallies, glorifies racial violence and promotes land expropriation without compensation, was welcomed.

This is not a metaphor. Malema was allowed into the UK in May 2025 to address his supporters in London. The only reason for his delayed arrival was the May Day bank holiday. When he protested, the British High Commission issued a grovelling apology, assuring him the visa holdup was merely bureaucratic, not moral.

The message could not be clearer: ideas from the Right are criminalised, but hate from the Left is indulged.

Toby Young has recently laid this out in detail in his excellent interview on GB News in the wake of the Lucy Connolly appeal decision. His conclusion: the UK no longer defends free speech as a principle, it defends only approved speech. You can chant about killing white farmers, provided your politics check the right boxes. But offer a sociological theory about demographic change? You’re banned.

Let’s be clear: Renaud Camus’s theory is provocative. It raises uncomfortable questions about identity, culture and immigration. One can challenge or reject it. But to silence it entirely, while welcoming actual political violence wrapped in revolutionary chic, is not only hypocritical. It’s dangerous.

Continues …