MEANWHILE…IN FRANCE…

By now you've probably heard: politics in France has turned a very bizarre corner, for the mainline parties, and their candidates, hardly made an impression. Instead, Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen are headed to a runoff election on May 7th. One poll that I saw had M. Macron winning with 23.9% of the votes, with Mm. Le Pen trailing closely with 21.4% of the votes. Fillon, Melenchon, Hamon came in at 19.9, 19.6, and 6.3% respectively. Here's the way it looks to the U.K.'s The Guardian:

French election: Macron and Le Pen go to second round – live coverage

Notably, neither Macron nor Le Pen together get a clear majority, but, interestingly enough, neither do the "mainline" candidates, who fell by the wayside. What this means in effect is that whether or not Macron or Le Pen win, they will have to govern either with each other, or by reaching out to those parties led in the last round of elections by Fillon, Melenchon & Co. And that will make governance difficult.  As all of this has been going on, I've been receiving a steady trickle of emails from members of this website who live in France, who inform me that many of the same tricks we saw applied in the previous US election have also been rolled out in France: pro-Le Pen comments are censored on social media, pro-EU/globaloney articles are pushed, &c. In spite of this, Le Pen has advanced to round two: the mainline candidates did not.

The question is, why?

In doing a little research for this blog, I came across the following article from Global Research News(copy and paste in your browser:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-main-issue-in-the-french-presidential-election-national-sovereignty-and-the-future-of-france/5586321

This article is well worth pondering at length, but I want to draw attention to certain statements critical of the traditional right-left divide, and why French politics looks so peculiar now. Consider, first, the critique of the right:

The upshot is that Fillon’s coherent pro-capitalist policy is not exactly what the dominant globalizing elite prefers. The “center left” is their clear political choice since Tony Blair and Bill Clinton revised the agendas of their respective parties. The center left emphasis on human rights (especially in faraway countries targeted for regime change) and ethnic diversity at home fits the long-term globalist aims of erasing national borders, to allow unrestricted free movement of capital. Traditional patriotic conservatism, represented by Fillon, does not altogether correspond to the international adventurism of globalization.

And now the left:

As the traditional left goal of economic equality was abandoned, it was superseded by emphatic allegiance to “human rights”, which is now taught in school as a veritable religion. The vague notion of human rights was somehow associated with the “free movement” of everything and everybody. Indeed the official EU dogma is protection of “free movement”: free movement of goods, people, labor and (last but certainly not least) capital. These “four freedoms” in practice transform the nation from a political society into a financial market, an investment opportunity, run by a bureaucracy of supposed experts. In this way, the European Union has become the vanguard experiment in transforming the world into a single capitalist market.

The French left bought heavily into this ideal, partly because it deceptively echoed the old leftist ideal of “internationalism” (whereas capital has always been incomparably more “international” than workers), and partly due to the simplistic idea that “nationalism” is the sole cause of wars. More fundamental and complex causes of war are ignored.

For a long time, the left has complained about job loss, declining living standards, delocalization or closure of profitable industries, without recognizing that these unpopular results are caused by EU requirements. EU directives and regulations increasingly undermine the French model of redistribution through public services, and are now threatening to wipe them out altogether – either because “the government is bankrupt” or because of EU competition rules prohibit countries from taking measures to preserve their key industries or their agriculture.

Add to this the following:

Meanwhile, it has become more and more obvious that EU monetarist policy based on the common currency, the euro, creates neither growth nor jobs as promised but destroys both. Unable to control its own currency, obliged to borrow from private banks, and to pay them interest, France is more and more in debt, its industry is disappearing and its farmers are committing suicide, on the average of one every other day. The left has ended up in an impossible position: unswervingly loyal to the EU while calling for policies that are impossible under EU rules governing competition, free movement, deregulation, budgetary restraints, and countless other regulations produced by an opaque bureaucracy and ratified by a virtually powerless European Parliament, all under the influence of an army of lobbyists.

Benoit Hamon remains firmly stuck on the horns of the left’s fatal dilemma: determination to be “socialist”, or rather, social democratic, and passionate loyalty to “Europe”. While insisting on social policies that cannot possibly be carried out with the euro as currency and according to EU rules, Hamon still proclaims loyalty to “Europe”. He parrots the EU’s made-in-Washington foreign policy, demanding that “Assad must go” and ranting against Putin and Russia.

And finally, this comment about Melenchon and Le Pen:

A most remarkable feature of this campaign is great similarity between the two candidates said to represent “the far left”, Mélenchon, and “the far right”, Marine Le Pen. Both speak of leaving the euro. Both vow to negotiate with the EU to get better treaty terms for France. Both advocate social policies to benefit workers and low income people. Both want to normalize relations with Russia. Both want to leave NATO, or at least its military command. Both defend national sovereignty, and can thus be described as “sovereignists”.

The only big difference between them is on immigration, an issue that arouses so much emotion that it is hard to discuss sensibly. Those who oppose immigration are accused of “fascism”, those who favor immigration are accused of wanting to destroy the nation’s identity by flooding it with inassimilable foreigners.

So where's my daily dose of speculation? A few months ago I predicted that even if Marine Le Pen does not win this bid for the French Presidency, the issues driving her and her party simply will not go away, especially if Mr. Globaloney continues to pursue the same policies with the same playbook, and to ignore the real issue.

That issue, I suspect, is much deeper than even Global Research understands, for the phenomenon is not political, it is cultural and civilizational, and it is, perhaps, not surprising at all that it should be France, and Britain (with the Brexit vote) where we see, if not the strongest opposition to Mr. Globaloney, then at least the most articulate and vocal, for those two nations are, to put it succinctly, the two oldest nation-states in the western world. They represent, so to speak, the core countries of modern western culture: Britain spread Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence and associated cultural institutions throughout the world via the British Empire. In doing so, it also put an end to many practices we would now consider barbaric. And yes, I realize in stating that I have taken a very unpopular view. (If you want to hear the politically correct view, attend an American university.) France, similarly, spread French law and jurisprudence and institutions throughout Europe during the Napoleonic era, which gave rise to the national aspirations of Italy and Germany and helped pave the way for their national unifications in the 19th century.

Why is this distinction between politics and culture important? It's very simple: if what is driving the Trump train, or the Brexit vote, or, now, the upheavals in French politics, is cultural and not political, then the phenomenon is not going to go away very quickly, nor very quietly, no matter what the politicians do or do not do.

The first politician in the West that truly understands this, and can articulate the cultural vision and aspect of the problem, wins.  Why? Because Mr. Globaloney has no real innate sense of culture. He has to buy it, but does not understand it, nor view himself as belonging to any cultural tradition(except a modern one no older than a century or century and a half). He endows modernist ugliness and promotes it at every turn (think David Rockefailure here, folks, and his "taste" in modern "art"); and people are turning from ugliness.

As for France, this will, indeed, be an election to watch, and I confess some personal emotional involvement; my paternal grandmother was French; I have my great-grandfather's (her father's) French prayer book; French composers - Saint-Saens, Rameau, Couperin, and so on - and musicians have enriched my personal life; when I studied organ, I played an edition of J.S. Bach's organ music edited and prepared by the grand master of French organists (Charles-Marie Widor), and so on. So I watch what goes on there with great personal feeling, because I do not want France to become something one can only read about in history books, another victim of Mr. Globaloney's hatred of and war on all things of beauty belonging to western culture and tradition.

See you on the flip side...

 

30 thoughts on “MEANWHILE…IN FRANCE…”

  1. Dear Joseph,
    It feels good to post again in your community after a long hiatus.
    I once came into contact with you with questions about my grandfather, a French Résistance fighter and military intelligence officer, later on in Leclerc’s 2nd Armored Division who died in the summer of ’44 on the eve of Strasbourg’s liberation.
    I will never forget how graceful, helpful and knowledgeable you were in your replies. Due to some very happy, but time-consuming changes in my life (my wedding, followed shortly by the birth of a little daughter) my already restricted research work had to come to an end – I had been hoping for some exciting discovery I would be able to tell you about.
    On the subject at hand, there’s a lot that could be said. It is late and my contribution may be jumbled and incomplete and I will gladly come back to post some more thoughts.
    While in a sense the results are a surprise, in another sense they are not. The party of Chirac, Sarkozy, Fillon et al. used, the Gaullist party which has had several names over the decades (RPF, RPR, UMP, LR) used to be a popular, just short of populist, at times, party, which means it had appeal in all social classes and categories. It was brought into the center, center right by Alain Juppé with the assent of then-president Jacques Chirac. Sarkozy used (lying about it, but very convincingly) Gaullist rethoric to get elected. Fillon seemed to hold promise after he won the primary in a landslide but had long been “contaminated” by the centrist line. He was just as spineless as the rest of them. He announced he would vote for Macron, whose backers had indicted him,, searched his offices and interrogated his wife, just 10 minutes after his defeat was announced.
    You mention the openly capitalist orientation of Fillon; maybe a detail is worth consideration, Fillon is an anglophile and his wife is Welsh. He never said too much about it but who knows, maybe a potential rapprochement under Fillon with the UK, given the Brexit situation, was something that was bothering the elites. The whole election process was a farce.
    Now to Macron: his loyalties are to the E.U. i.e. Germany. Shall we call him gauleiter Macron? To wrap up for tonight, I think France is toast. Five years is enough to turn over to Germany the last remnants of French partial sovereignty i.e. the military apparatus. It may have been toast for a long time. I still have no explanation for the fact that Mitterrand was able to finance his 1974 through prominent collaborator René Bousquet and go to the grave of Philippe Pétain every year during his presidency, with the press hardly peeping a word about it. What this, and other little facts hint to, in my perception, is that collaborationist France, not gaullist France as we always thought, had the upper hand all along. The French deep state is collaborationist at heart.
    France has had a horrible XXth century and WOULD be over already without the roles of a few great men in particular Clemenceau and De Gaulle. They are quasi miraculous characters when you think about it. So a miracle is not out of the realm of possibility. Le Pen is not that “saviour”; voting for her is a very hard pill to swallow for a gaullist given her party’s past, but is very tempting nonetheless as a generous “f.u.” gesture to the establishment.

    1. tremendous incitefull posting, Urr12-

      my French friends in the Alsace always vote for the Le Pen faction not because they agree with her but just feel nothing will change if they vote for the existing major parties; they are more than aware, however, that Le Pen has more than a few skeletons in her closet… so now the French have an independent, no party adherent who has a severe Oedipus complex; bon appetit! 🙁

      1. I’ve visited Alsace a few times in the past years and just loved the people there. They wouldn’t need my post above because they were in the front lines, they know. Needless to say they’re aware of Le Pen’s skeletons in the closet too. Heads and hearts all in the right place.
        I want to thank you, and Joseph, and all Americans who still think well of us. It means a lot.

    2. Urr12, I agree with your observations especially with regard to the French deep state being collaborationist rather than gaullist. Another way to say it is that the French deep state is as Nazi as the USA’s deep state and that of Germany. Le Pen as “saviour” is not something I would have even come close to imagining. If she had not distanced herself from her father, she would have no chance. But this could be her moment should enough of us decide to vote for her simply on the premise that it is the only way to slow down the runaway train that is destroying France and to send a very clear message to the establishment and the deep state to go engage in self-vivisection as soon as possible.

      1. Yes, but at least part of the US deep state is not, or so it seemed when Trump was able to get elected. The French deep state’s so opaque and our media’s so lame and monovocal, it’s difficult to perceive any tendencies, especially if it has a patriot faction too.

  2. Great post Doc and hilarious that following your logic Trump represents the understanding of American culture.
    Channelling the maitre d from ferris buellers day off, I “weep for the future”

  3. Put simply, the French people have woken up. The main stream parties are now out of the game, and whoever wins will have to take the country in another direction. If Le Pen wins, then it’s goodbye to the EU and it’s about time too.

  4. Article: “Unable to control its own currency, obliged to borrow from private banks, and to pay them interest, France is more and more in debt…”

    And there you have it; all else is consequence. “I care not who…”

    Recently, I have begun reading Michael Hudson’s historical views on economics. He traces current troubles to a period in the early Roman Empire when creditors became fundamentally more important than debtors. Before this time, the inevitable ‘stratification’ of a society was balanced – or de-spun – by occasional Jubilees that reimpowered the lower classes. The loss to the upper classes was seen as necessary to support social stability.

    This method of ‘reinvigorating’ a society was practiced by the Sumerians, Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, and even early Greeks. It passed the test of time, being adopted by disparate cultures over thousands of years. When the Jubilee was effectively ‘outlawed’, it resulted in permanent lower classes, widespread slavery, and the rise of feudalism. What’s not to like?

    A reader (here, I believe) noted that the left/right political division was becoming incomprehensible – where the far left and far right candidates seemed near identical in their views. The reader noted that a simple 90 degree change-of-viewpoint made it all very clear. Rather than a left/right divide, simply make it a top/bottom divide. As he/she noted, it all became perfectly clear who the candidate represented…

  5. if my read sources are correct Macron has been funded by the Rothschild clan;

    I’ve also heard the polls were rigged (gosh!- so what’s new?)-

    beside that, I think most people refuse to see the obvious about this man: his wife (if my French friends sources are correct his former German teacher) is 25 yrs. older than he is!; if this man doesn’t have an Oedipus complex I don’t know who does; a 39 yr. old man who hasn’t yet been weaned is running for the French presidency?- I’m speechless…

    be well all-

    Larry in Germany

    1. Oedipus? French politics? We have a woman who slew (metaphorically) her father to take control of the FN and a man who married his controller.. sorry mother..

      The only good thing about Oedipus, is that it was the end of the Epics of the Gods (slaying dragons and half snake half human things in the underground) and the start of the Epics of Man.. (by that I mean, the stories started concentrating on humans from there on with Gods being generally really mean to them..)

  6. This problem can be traced back to the deal Abraham and his two wife’s made with Yahweh-Allah. And to Europe failure to consolidate culturally and politically. Both the Europeans and Western-Asians refuse to face up to their tribal-barbarism masquerading as civilization’s they both tend to project their failures on to their victims. Until they both stare at their faces in the mirror they will never solve their problems and will lead the World down the road to enslavement and destruction.

    1. I think that one was a wife and the other was a slave.. you see, Human Trafficking.. It was very probably a probleme with social status that led to Sarah being so mean with Hagar.

  7. We all have crosses to bear. One such cross is those banksters in the temple. Be the temple of church or state. There temple is composed of international money changers. They pay quite well. Just sign your sovereign soul away; or your nation state/culture. There IS a better world/globe; but first we as a people must get our political/economic basis set on a true course for all living beings and recognize true wealth is living wealth. The banksters represent a model based upon Earth as a dead rock and humans as commodities. Slavery is no accident; it is cooked into the recipe of our banksters political/economic model.
    Jesus recognized it and kicked them out of the temple.
    Time to kick….

    1. and replace it with a economy based on life; not death/ A nation state has no chance in hell, unless it issues its own currency.
      China is doing so and implementing tariffs to keep the state economy strong; as did the early American colonies.
      The National Security state looks to be interesting in empire and not the nation state.
      Whether France, Greece, the U.S., it doesn’t matter the international banking private cartel/Deep State apparatuses are linked across the globe. They have no interest in nation states; except to erase their borders. Oh, those borders may remain; but they’ll be under control of an instrument like the proposed TPP/TTIP.
      This cancerous temple’s “money”s scythe is mowing down life across the globe. Its path is one of destruction.
      It needs to be taken out, down to the core of its very deep roots.
      In short, nothing short of a paradigm shift is required.
      Individually it can be done.
      As a group?

      That’s my dose of high octane for the day.

      1. I usually try to look at the big picture (it’s not pleasant) and it seems insurmountable odds for the good to win. BUT like Goethe said “I love whomever longs for the impossible.” We live as if it were possible with our ideas, attitudes, expectations, beliefs, thoughts, feelings, choice and decisions, the material we have to manifest change. Return to the earth and re-program our hearts to love instead of mass confusion. Send good vibrations of harmony and we receive them right back as a hologram and they multiply throughout the cosmos.

  8. At perhaps a slightly more fundamental level even than important cultural considerations one may find evolutionary markers — putting aside the probability of an artificially-engineered ancient Man. Nature has bequeathed two roughly equivalent gene survival strategies: firstly, a “spawning” by sexually mature mates of prodigious numbers of offspring only some of which need survive to further the necessary genetic information or else secondly a more careful investment into individual offspring, each of which will receive every available resource so as to ensure a more successful propagation of genes.

    One might reasonably suggest that cultures of the West, whose birth rates have steadily fallen, predominately practice the latter, more deliberative gene strategy; while those cultures currently reduced to mass migration westward, whether owing to drought, famine, disease, strife, subjugation or Soros, generally practiced the aforementioned “spawning” strategy — though, to be sure. this “strategizing” occurs as often at the subconscious level of personality or gender as at either the half-conscious level of culture or even the fully conscious, “It takes a village to raise a child” cynical political level. Today as many native French citizens may well be in favor of migration as against it, a split perhaps reflecting the difference between those who see themselves primarily as providers (“individual investment strategists”) and those who see themselves primarily as nurturers (“numbers strategists”.)

    It goes without saying, I’m sure, that democracies, not just in the West but anywhere, remain forever vulnerable to becoming “swamped” by the so-called spawning element of human society — yet certainly all the more so when invaded by migratory populations from large-family, spawn cultures. (Perhaps the older world cultures are more likely predominately spawning cultures because this had been the original human strategy; and that this one strategy only later gave rise to the individually-invested strategy, which, arising from it, led inexorably to conflict over available resources and thus to the first human migrations northward, westward or eastward [with the cultivation of existing resources arising still later as a subset of this new and diverging genetic strategy.])

    Extending this view, the seemingly inscrutable machinations of the PTB might be viewed merely as an example of a so-called runaway selection, whereby a previously adaptive strategy, such as the ostentatious display of parental investment potential, takes on a somewhat maladaptive impetus of its own, much as the antlers of a moose evolved into a magnificent display, yet one entirely unwieldy one and beyond all practicality. This view wouldn’t for a second excuse the psychopathy of the PTB. But one might more accurately view their odd courses of action as a Breakaway Selection rather than as a Breakaway Civilization.

  9. Let’s face it, Europe’ s future is that of a giant theme park for Asian tourists… and it won’t be a bad thing. It will restore national identity as the tourists will expect to see European folk in traditional costumes and I assure you there will be zero desire to see hijabs in the restored quaint Europe. Muslims will be forced to assimilate and don lederhosen and kilts or get out. Africans will have no role at all as no Asian tourist is going to dish out money to go to Paris or Vienna just to see inauthentic Europeans sleeping on cardboard and urinating in the streets (not to mention the unwelcome criminal tendencies). The benefits of a tourist economy for Europeans are obvious as most Europeans have evolved to view work as something they do to subsidize their life and not life in itself. They would become a continent of Jamaicans who would devote most of their energy to having a good time when they are not working. They would live in the present and not the future. How could get one get too attached to a job rowing Asians around in the canals of Venice?

    This Asian tourist supremacy will all depend on the Chinese, Japanese, Korean plan of having North Korea destroy the USA’s Pacific presence and getting the Russians and what’s left of the USA’s army and navy to fight a war in Germany (in order to decimate the last population in Europe who still like to build stuff) and Poland (whose land has been a perennial battlefield and therefore scarce in cultural treasures. Perhaps the Auschwitz swimming pool will be restored and it can become a water park).

  10. Its the same old tired MO that has been put in place for years. I’m reading a lot about Travistock. Constant media propaganda and fear mongering, hysteria..
    Now that Macron the Mac (mac means pimp in french :)) and his Rothechild Masters who.. lets remember.. helped fund the Travistock Instuitute.. with the Rockerfellers and the Royal Family… and they were very interested in mass mind control. and individual mind control.. and setting off wars to destroy European civilisation.. and making minorities into hated oppressers.. In fact, I think, that if the Travistock Inst itute hadnt started doing what they did.. We’d have stopped War in Europe when we threw the Freemason Napolean in jail.
    Or not..

    1. Saw Macron in Telly last night.. He has as much Charisma as a smelly wet sock that you’ve found in behind a public toilet. The man reads his diatribes off papersheets.. he masters NOTHING, has NO conviction.. other than..
      “I’m pro european, Ill be working for Angela Merkel, who I adore. and its Europe all the way.”
      You ask him what he’s going to do.. I’m going to defend my project.. with out EVER telling us what the project actually is…. (well I have my ideas, but it gets very tinfoiley very quickly and I hope Im wrong..)

      So.. more Globalistic hyerbolic political correctnez.

      He spent 10 minutes hammering on about how his ‘wife’….(controller probably..) will have ‘her word to say’ on her role in the future. That he is absolutely FOR women equality. Then spent 2 hours not looking at, nor answering the questions of.. and talking blatantly over her whilst she was speaking not listening to a word she says… (sounds like my last wife..) the woman presenter who was asking him questions.. What’s the matter Emmy? Scared of a woman??… ?? (hey Im’ getting married to a Sicilienne.. I know FEAR …. :))

    2. Travistock tactics..
      during WW1, they told the Gublic.. (Gullible Public) that the Kaiser was cutting arms and legs of Belgian children as they rampaged through..
      During Iraq War 1 (otherwise known as God Save the Queen’s BP installations..) American public opinion was swayed by the Kuwait Diplomat to US’s daughter tearful testimony (fake) about children being pulled from incubators.. (by Saddam himself.. then.. then he threw them to the floor and stamped on them.. then.. then…)
      Now we have real chemicals being used to kill children to get real reactions.. PROGRESS PEOPLE!!!
      I think that they’re getting frustrate with the French, because the French are just too pessimistic to get aroused.. They had their revolution, they Animal Farmed their way straight back into the same mess that they were trying to get out of… (well no.. they had civil war until Napolean came along.. but WHY did they have Civil War?? because they still couldnt get on with living with each other.. someone still had to be king…) and now the Frecnh just cant be bothered.
      Just depressed constant pessimism.. interlaced sometimes with Shoa guillt. God Travistock is evil and efficace.. why cant the force of good have such a german like efficiency..

  11. Mélenchon wrote a witty, extremely anti-German hegemony book called “Le hareng de Bismarck: le poison allemand” (Bismarck’s Herring. The German Poison). If somebody on the so-called extreme right had authored this, somebody over the Rhine might have been tempted to bring Big Bertha back. But when he wrote it nobody imagined he would have been a presidential candidate. The globalist press defines him as being on the “extreme left” but he actually part of the European centre-left social democratic tradition, but more Euro-skeptic than most.
    https://www.amazon.fr/hareng-Bismarck-Jean-Luc-M%C3%A9lenchon/dp/2290127949/ref=sr_1_4/259-8459404-5841652?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1493385059&sr=1-4&keywords=m%C3%A9lenchon

  12. Not bizarre at all but inevitable. Things are coming to head and the old Socialist left, embodied by the petulant miquetoast Hollande and the cringe-provokingly clueless Hamon, who obviously has never done a day’s worth of constructive work in his life, has self-immolated in a pyre of irrelevancy. Fillon, the dutiful one, was character assassinated by the bankster cabal backing Macron for the petty graft considered to be the birthright of every French politician of ministerial rank.

    Macron, the intense, beady-eyed Little Weasel, has about as much personal charm and appeal as a kitchen appliance. He talks pretentious, vacuous word salad and so can effortlessly formulate and vehemently proclaim such face-palm worthy oxymorons as ” I want to the president of French patriots, not of nationalists,” not bothering to parse that a nation is first necessary to engender feelings of patriotism.

    The public has not yet been truly exposed to this Obama-lite ginned up puppet, but now that they are getting a good look at him, his poll numbers have dropped a point a day since the end of the first round. Le Pen nailed him when she said in a debate, “You have an insane talent; you end up speaking for seven minutes and I can’t even summarize your train of thought, you’ve said nothing, it’s like the absolute void between the stars.”
    Lacking Obama’s innate charm, this little wind-up toy is going to be a harder sell than they thought.

    1. Nice Basta – Yep.. Without a catchphrase and ZERO CHARISMA they’re gonna have a hard time selling him.. I guess Lepen will get through because everyone will either not vote or put a white ballot in.. Either action being a total waste of time.. But the hardliner Fascists… who dont want to be called fascist.. But aren’t socialist enough to be called Nazi’s.. heh.
      Yeh I agree, the man talks without saying anything.. He’d be the perfect MEP to send up to Brussels to yesman the agenda up there..

  13. Excerpts from Marine Le Pen campaign speech April 27 th 2017

    The showdown is a clash of opposites, a contest between her superheated anti-immigrant, xenophobic language and his cool and lofty formulas for restoring France’s economy while upholding its global alliances. On Thursday, to an adoring crowd of thousands in Nice, Ms. Le Pen made the most of that contrast in her first speech since finishing second in the first round of voting on Sunday.

    Mr. Macron, a former economy minister and banker, was a “globalist,” an “immigrationist” and someone who is capable of cutting himself off from the country, Ms. Le Pen roared to flag-waving supporters at a vast auditorium at the edge of town. The boos for Mr. Macron lasted for minutes.
    She immediately lashed out at her younger and more inexperienced opponent, questioning his patriotism, and in one of the far right’s oldest tropes, suggesting that his policies meant that he was not French enough.

    “He’s trying to call himself a patriot,” Ms. Le Pen said.

    “It’s like the pyromaniac who wants to be called a fireman,” she added. “This is a referendum for or against France. I ask you to choose France. His horizon is the devalorization of France.”
    Mr. Macron was the choice of an “oligarchy,” Ms. Le Pen said, a favorite boogeyman in her speeches that is never precisely defined. But in a line of attack that could carry weight with millions of undecided, deeply anticapitalist voters who opted for the far-left candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon in the first round, Ms. Le Pen tore into her opponent’s background in finance.

    “I think he could be a good banker,” she said. “He’s got the insensitivity of that profession, with no conscience for the human consequences of his decisions.”

    “Whose ambitions is he really serving?” she asked.

    “He’s preparing a lightning strike against the workers,” Ms. Le Pen said. “The country that Emmanuel Macron wants is not a country anymore. It’s a place where the law of the strongest rules.”

    And in Nice, a city still reeling from a terrorist attack in July that killed dozens, she painted a picture of an Islamist menace, vowing to confront “provocations from the Islamists in the cafeterias, in the hospitals, in the streets.” As is often the case in Ms. Le Pen’s speeches, this was linked to what she calls “the migratory submersion,” identified with her opponent.

    1. Great information on Le Pen. She sounds too good to be true. I liked her when she refused to wear a headscarfhttps://needtoknow.news/2017/03/eus-anti-free-speech-assault-frances-marine-le-pen/

Comments are closed.