by Ramin Mazaheri for the Saker Blog
The two big differences between 2017 and 2022 are that back then France had a presidential candidate who should have been called a National Socialist, and that in 2022 the country has somehow moved even further to the right.
History will show that back in 2017 the Great Financial Crisis – just the latest failure of Western liberalism – had inflamed the masses too much for every single politician to ignore: Marine Le Pen thus dropped the Reaganism of her father and made it to the second round.
She defended economic ideas similar to the Germanic National Socialists of the 1930s, who pillaged the Marxists of their “anti-international finance” analysis only to dangle economic equality for those of a certain religion and ethnicity. The latter is why they weren’t socialists, of course, but merely people who somewhat understood the economics buttressing Western Liberal Democracy.
Five years after 2017, Eric Zemmour draws widespread praise from people who believe they are entirely well-meaning by saying that he is, “here to save the French people and France…not here to save the world.” It’s a telling, semi-messianic remark because it is truly straight out of Adolf Hitler’s platform in the 1930s.
Ah, old Adolf – we can’t bring him up in the West, can we?
Many have heard of Godwin’s Law, or the rule of Nazi analogies: an Internet adage asserting that as an online discussion grows longer (regardless of topic or scope), the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Adolf Hitler approaches. However, an important corollary is that whenever someone compares someone or something to Nazism – that person has lost the argument and/or the argument is summarily over.
Essentially, the world is to accept that all discussions of Western politics cannot discuss the anti-Western Liberalism ideology which was German Nazism.
How difficult it will be, then, to describe a French election where the four top candidates are all on the far-right – either economically, politically, culturally or all three!
I will come out and say it: Today’s left does not want to talk about the socialism in Germanic National Socialism, even though there was some.
Namely: Unlike seemingly all Western politicians today, Hitler actually read Marx and incorporated something of class analysis into Germanic Nazism. He clearly was familiar with the perfectly accurate Marxist analysis of European historico-economics up until the late 19th century: landed wealth was joined by commercial/trading wealth was joined by industrial/financial/stock-jobbing wealth, and then they all stopped squabbling and peacefully joined hands to oppress the 99%. Western Liberal Democracy remains – eternally – at this point.
German National Socialism opposed – in their campaign promises, at least – the domination of international high finance and the liberalism (whether “neo-”, “ultra-” or sans-préfixe it’s all the same: free markets, unregulated capitalism, rights for those who can afford it) which forever is ultimately cover for a bankocracy. In political power structures and culturally Germanic National Socialism totally rejected the grassroots empowerment and multiculturalism of Socialist Democracy.
But the right does also not come out and say it, either: Today’s right doesn’t want to talk about the economic socialism in German Nazism – because they oppose talking about socialism with anything but death threats – whereas they are entirely thrilled to use their same racist scapegoating and autocracy.
Hitler would have called Zemmour far-right, and that’s saying something
Returning to Zemmour’s jingoist messianic message: He promises to save only those within his own borders and only those of a certain color/religion/DNA, and thus he totally rejects the internationalism embodied by socialism, just as Hitler did. Nobody was less internationalist than old Adolf – his nation was to be a purely Teutonic one. This message still resounds across Europe 90 years later – Zemmour is hardly unique – in what can easily be termed “National Neoliberalism”.
Zemmour doesn’t just go against the tide of history, he is anti-history – in the sense that his own particular interpretation of French history hopes to be predominant, and not interpretations which rely on accuracy, rationality, scientific historical analysis, etc. Thus, Zemmour also incarnates the autocratic vision of a dictator like Hitler on how a political power structure should operate – per his whims. France is whatever Zemmour says it is. If he says France means no kebab shops or people named “Ramin”, then so be it.
Frankly, I think Zemmour is a total waste of my time, and it’s easy to explain why:
Zemmour is so pathetically predictable precisely because – as this analysis of Zemmour notes, by the must-read political polymath (and longtime inhabitant of France) Pepe Escobar – he’s such a sycophant; so obviously fuelled by winning the approval of the elite. He is not like Donald Trump, who was born with the brazen independence of the super rich – Trump never needed a patron – and who was much more a genuine political outsider. LOL, you work at Le Figaro for 25 years and you’re not tenderly ensconced in the political mainstream? Tu parles…. With Trump a voter had at least some grounds to hope that: Here is someone asking for my vote who might actually have the courage to be a renegade against the 1% – a hope that was dashed on the unimpressionable rock which is apparently Trump’s brain. Not only will Zemmour never be 1/10th the loose cannon Trump was, Zemmour does’t even have the potential to do so. Few outside France realise that Zemmour is not even intellectually courageous enough to actually be original – he’s the racist, social-climbing, poor man’s Alain Soral, who had a Yellow Vest on seemingly immediately.
Zemmour’s long-delayed economic program is totally Reaganite/neoliberal – this was totally predictable precisely because he’s such a toady to the elite. Hitler truly would have called Zemmour right-wing, economically.
Therefore, I assume Zemmour’s totally pro-insider ideology makes him so unelectable that I won’t have to say much more on him, unless I have to in-between the first and second round, and thus Macron’s re-election. I should note that I treated Emmanuel Macron with very similar disdain in my journalism in 2017 – both are total suck-ups to the elite, of course.
Zemmour offers the same old reactionary faux-promise: reversion to a bygone (autocratic, insular) era. He has kept all the rabid anti-internationalism and racism which helped sweep Hitler to power, and which seems totally embedded in Western society after nearly a century, and none of the economic promises of Germanic National Socialism, unlike Le Pen in 2017.
Marine Le Pen, whom I would totally disavow in a one-round vote, exactly as I explained in 2017, is far worse than she was in 2017, as my previous column just showed. 2017 had much more on the table – namely her anti-liberalism economic policies of leaving the euro, a vote on Frexit six months after her election and repudiating banker-induced debt.
Xenophobia in the headlines means liberalism’s economic failures aren’t
What liberalism learned from Germanic National Socialism is that xenophobia and security (greatly augmented by the total insecurity provoked by corona’s alleged once-in-a-millennium threat) are spectacles just big enough to dominate the headlines, and thus to ignore neoliberalism’s failures, and thus to get elected more liberalist, 1%-er proxies.
(To put it in Zemmour’s terms: France’s economic problem is Muslim welfare, not banker welfare. A pathetic intellectual analysis.)
Thus I can report that there is no economic program being bandied about during the French election campaign, despite the screams of the inflation-gutted French masses. Have you even noticed that we’re just two months from the vote? They’re calling it a”Teflon campaign”, where faux-issues and faux-candidates like Zemmour aren’t sticking, thus producing a 10% drop in domestic interest in the upcoming vote. Like I wrote – it’s nothing as compelling as 2017, to say nothing of 2012’s hope that Hollande would end austerity (Germanic National Neoliberalism, of course).
It is precisely by ignoring history – by refusing to acknowledge Napoleon Bonaparte’s revolutionary contributions, or by calling them the “Revolutions of 1848” when they produced nothing but political counter-revolutions everywhere but France, or by ignoring French liberalism’s collusion with Bismarck to lay siege to Paris in 1871, or by claiming that World War I started merely by some sort of unforeseen accident, or by refusing to allow any political discussion of Germanic National Socialism, etc. – that Western Liberal Democracy is able to persist despite the regular depressions, inequalities and the suicidal disgust with politics it provokes.
And yet despite Zemmour’s ascent to 4th place the Yellow Vests proved that there are indeed pre-revolutionary conditions in France – my book on them will soon start to be published, chapter by chapter, because that is so obviously true.
But with the viability of the candidacy of Zemmour – who truly must be considered to be to the right of Germanic National Socialists and Adolf Hitler – it does’t take a historian like Trotsky to note that revolutionary changes never came via a Western Liberal Democratic ballot.
List of articles covering the 2022 French elections
Catastrophe since 2017: How to cover France’s presidential election? – November 22, 2021
Le Monde’s circus invite: ‘France is a leftist country which votes right’ – January 27, 2022
Le Pen now wants in the euro & no Frexit – should the Left want her in? – February 2, 2022
Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for PressTV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese.
Zemmour is a Pied Noir, for those not in the know. it refers to the knee-high boots, black obviously, these ‘Crème de la crotte’ used to wear while surveying their stolen domains in Algeria, many also used ‘le fouet’ the crop to unsure a demarcation between them and the natives, many were Jewish, if not all Zionist to their gold teeth… Zemmour is a phony implant from the Israeli Lobby, they will have two horses in that race since Macrotte is also a product of Rothchild, although this could backfire on them in the first round, either helping Marine Le Pen or even the Socialists, making a possible second round something of a very interesting dilemma for the French to either elect back a stooge or to take the chance with the unknown… will soon see.
Quick reaction of mine: I am tired of generalizations and stereotypes! How many “pieds noirs” have you been living around? I grew up in a cheap French subburb (ZUP) all made of apartment-buildings. My floor neighbor family was a family “pieds-noirs”, one of many that moved out of Algeria, as well as many arabic people, “ les Arkis”, to avoid the revenge of the other Arabic algerians who did the resistance, “ the fellagas” i believe. Sorry if I am mistaken… old childhood memories. The point is not that they were good loving people, but that they were not the “ masters with black boots and SM fouets” you evoke. They were in majority humble families (as a kid I thought they were called “piedsnoirs” for being poor and barefoot… thank you for lifting that naive young belief). Yes it was colonialism, with its exploitation and abuse… yet, it is good to keep perspective (migration-flows in the Maghreb) and stay in touch with our humanity.
That reminds me of the righteous vindictive J-P Sartre, with his apparent sense of intellectual superiority, playing the politically correct against Albert Camus for his choice in favor of the pieds noirs families to stay and live in Algeria, their home. What is often not said is that JP Sartre was speaking loud denouncing the “salauds”, the “Nazis” and related, but behaved quite cowardly during WWII/ occupation. On the other hand Camus was brave and helped also all he could in Algeria to help stopping abuses.
So, I am just reminding you that it is easy to slide into clichés.
As far as Ramin’s article, although i see it’s analytic value, I end up with an unsatisfactory feeling. First, even if I agree that liberalism is the problem, not the colored population, still, immigration is out of control for many reasons: “free-trade”, cheap labor, lose borders, wars refugees, “politics”, poverty…
What could be said is that immigration cannot be under control by staying in the EU. That cancels Zeymour pretend program, as it is not implying the Frexit. Quickly on zeymour, I see him as a not funny and cunning version of the animated Megamind. I guess he wants to be a hero and has no respect for the vilains, the Arabs. That’s popular.
Also, I am tired of that Right/Left bullshit. How can anybody still prefer left from right? It is all corrupt… except: some little candidates, and in particular, Francois Asselineau, head at the Union Popular Republican ( classified “diverse”). He has a solid program, based on getting out of NATO, EU and Euro. Very very little Mass Media time, not the most sexy or catchy, but much understanding and integrity. Of course, he is not quite as radical as needed. None is. Valerie Bugault and Juan Branco are more revolutionary that way… not candidate though.
Just to wrap up, I want to say that there is the cliche’ racist Right and anti-racist Left that keeps people polarized as well as confused. The “Left” did great harm just like the “dems” in the US.
We are living interesting times when nothing is quite black or white as we thought or would have preferred.
Just a quick word on Camus and Sartre. Camus supported the French imperialist war on Algeria and said (paraphrase): “I am a Frenchman first.” Unlike Sartre, who wrote the famous preface to Frantz Fanon’s “The Wretched of the Earth” besides refusing the Nobel Prize. From his works like “The Rebel” and “The Stranger”, much beloved of liberals worldwide, Camus comes across as a nihilist, bourgeois individualist, not a revolutionary like Che Guevara. His outlook is similar to that of Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn, much beloved Soviet “dissidents” by the West, at least once upon a time, but actually counterrevolutionaries who supported the Vietnam War. Fie on all of them!
“Camus supported the French imperialist war on Algeria and said (paraphrase): “I am a Frenchman first.”
No he didn’t support the French imperialist war. He was in favor of letting the pieds noirs families coexist with the Algerians. He was torn. He denounced as a journalist the abuses. He was raised by his mom who was cleaning richer people’s homes. Definitely not pro liberalism. In “ l’homme révolté “, you see that the main point of a revolted man is to curb the hubris, with measure, self imposed limits, the antithesis of free for all.
It is interesting you bring up Che Guevara in the picture. He became the icon of “revolutionary free spirit” perfectly in time to feed neo liberalism”, where “freedom” to run after our desires is the new motto. Michel Clouscard in the 70’s described very well how the 1968 revolution was channeled into more freedom to consume, more freedom to fuck around… the next evolution of liberalism. Che Guevara was born rich and decided to fight for the poor, realizing on the field that poor people, farmers, were terrified by him and the other guerilleros , even though he was even paying for the food he could get from them… even though he and his comrades were suffering for them… that was the “idea”anyway. Read his journal and you will realize the suffering and the irony, the dire reality of someone trying really hard to make himself loved, accepted as good and just, and yet finding people being afraid of him… finding people busy trying to survive. Banging his cultivated understanding of things against the robust ignorance of people.
Do you know that Sartre was also a born rich who spoke highly of the bolcheviks but didn’t resist the German occupation, unlike Camus. I have a hard time with people preaching revolution but staying comfy in their head.
Bottom line I think Camus had a very “for life” attitude. He had that love to play with life, as a team, be it playing soccer in the “streets” of Algeria, being a reporter or a lover. Sartre and “el Che” were , I would say, not nearly as healthy. They tried to compensate either mentally or being a great example to follow. They were literally sickos, no offense… and yet, that built-in vitality matters. I am not promoting the perfect super man . Nietzsche did his best, Camus too.
It ‘s all God. We have our preferences, our likes and dislikes.
I was mostly attempting to warn about clichés and the tendency to quickly make someone a good guy or a bad guy.
You know one of the reasons of the French invasion of North Africa was to stop the centuries long slave raids? Imagine that not all slavers were white men!
I refuse to accept that my blond daughter will be harassed on the streets of Sweden because shes not wearing modest clothing such as a hijab. If it comes to war, I will fight for my land and tolerant people all around who are sick of being pushed around in the name of tolerance. I have also lived in France and areas that are dominated by MENA are dangerous and un-pleasant, especially for women who dare to insist that they have as much right to participate in public life as men. I am also aware that most of the victims are themselves immigrants.
Final word: today the word leftist essentially lacks meaning. Most who self-identify as leftists are strongly in favor of policies that benefit the global 1%, be it war, mass migration or mandatory vaccines.
Perhaps it was always like this : where did Trotsky get all his money from when in Manhattan?
You do realise that, prior to the modern era, most traditionalist Christian women dressed as Muslim do? Why do Western “conservatives” adopt a schizophrenic attitude: on the one hand condemning “woke” ideology and extremist feminism, on the other berating Muslims for enforcing patriarchy and punishing sodomites, adulterers, et al. via stoning. Prior to the nineteenth century, and especially during the Middle Ages, Western Christendom was more similar to Islamic civilisation than dissimilar.
It was only based on one speech years ago, but I felt that Marion Le Pen (Maréchal) would one day be President of France. Opinions?
Macron is doing his hail Mary pass in Moscow. If that succeeds, he’ll win the election easily. He would have saved all of Europe(EU), that’s the spin we’ll hear.
Macron hasnt got much change of doing anything other than ending up in jail.
Nor has BoJo or the rest of them.
Your spot on Ramin. To top it off those wannabe french national-zionists are funded by oligarchs like Bouygues and Bolloré who built their fortune on looting french African colonies. Bolloré logistics controls several ports in the Gulf of Guinea courtesy of their french monopoly and nazi inspired franc cfa currency. The same Bolloré built his media empire by monopolizing west African TV and communication markets with Canal + Africa. He later recycled the proceeds and profits to finance Cnews, his french version of FOX news. So basically, we have a comical farce whereby the french far-right from Marine LePen to Eric Zemmour are bankrolled with African blood loot !!! Those cretins are feeding gullible frenchies a steady dose of hatred about African and muslim migrants invading France, while feeding at the through of la France-Afrique. With their current elites, France is going down fast. We can already see how events are unfolding in Mali, where the french military is steadily being kicked out the country by a young special forces Colonel Assimi Goita acting in tandem with his new russian allies. After the military coups in Guinea and Burkina Faso, we can expect other countries in their colonial empire will emulate the malian officers. The gambit to overthrow Gaddafi, and pushback against African sovereignty has finally backfired. Some analysts are even predicting that Mali will soon ditch the french central bank and franc cfa to issue it’s own currency. We’re living in interesting times.
The political class is completely oblivious of the genuine and pressing demands of people in France.
People’s resistance believe is staged:
First by voting somebody perceived less dangerous (Voting against somebody)
Second by non voting at all
Third, this might happen in future, by supporting a future more serious, more effective yellow west revolt.
The continuous dismantling of the social state and serious inflation will make people desperate and no
media ‘Gleichschaltung’ will help anymore to ignore reality.
Cheers from Gers.
Sorry but this item is bad.
And Zemmour is the only candidate who clearly wants to go out from OTAN and want to go closer to Russia
As a Muslim activist, the author have the right to hate Zemmour not that to say lies about him.
No more, no less, Zemmour is in the path of de Gaulle.
In France, muslims invide us and want WE cave with THEIR cult and culture.
No way sur.
Zemmour is not against immigrante, is not against arabians, is not against muslims, he clearly welcome then in ALL his meeting. However, few conditions:
– they act like good citizen. And they don’t full prisons, and stop acting like thieves, rape, kill, beat, robe, deal drugs.
– they work and they don’t let themselves live good while planting the best social system in the World and in spiting to our land.
-they act moraly good without abuse and permanent cheat.
– They RESPECT the customs of the land they provide them free lodging, free food, free education for their kids, free health system, fair justice, fair police.
-They accept our holly princip of secularism wich is founded on our bloody history of religions war: IN FRANCE YOU DON’T WORRY YOUR NEIGHBOURS WITH YOUR RELIGION. You’re free to pray as you want and who you want but you can’t show it. WE know the price of invasive religion.
– YOU COME ONLY IF YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO.
If you respect that, black, white, yellow, christian, bhuddist, muslim, jew or what you want you will be treated exactly as the others citizen.
But it’s not all, Zemmour want to stop Woke madness.
He want to stop the judges who decided to make law instead of enforce her.
He want to go out NATO
He want to sink down UE
He only want to protect France and it’s people of the general planting of our land.
And no, he’s not Hitler
He has NO racial agenda, no religious agenda, just prevent one of them to eat everything, he has NO parlementary aversion, he has NO panfrench obsession, he has NO imperial purpose, he has NO rude and rough militia that frighten in contrary of islamists wich beheaded, betrhoated, shot, crush 800 french people since 6 years.
It’s a revolting and false trial against Zemmour. Disgusting.
The way you speak about Zemmour is exactly the same that the anglos and friends about Putin.
Exactement, et c’est tout a fair pareil en Suede. The Muslim Brotherhood has organized Muslim foster homes so that Muslim children who get mistreated at home don’t have to be placed in a Swedish home, because they do not like our culture! They are not refugees, they are invaders. One day the oil will be gone in the Middle East but they will be a dominant force in rainy, fertile Europe.
You say Zemmour is not against immigration and that all immigrants should live their lives as Frenchmen. The problem here is that most don’t want to. Their culture does not allow for this. Are his words genuine? Do you really think what he says is achievable, or could it be that he may be a zionist furthering the Kalergi plan? I find him most disingenuous and his credentials poor to say the least. The rest are weasel words to fool the French into thinking he is some kind of knight in shining armour. Sadly the French have a track record of electing poor leaders through their own niavety. IMO he’s another zionist stooge much like Zelensky in Ukraine. It’ll end in tears if he’s elected, just as it would if Macron were to be re elected.
“He wants to go out of NATO”
“He wants to sink down EU”
So how do you explain Zemmour has no intention to frexit ? He’s one of the many candidates who clearly disclaimed to get out of the Eu, which is based on two treaties, one of which in its article 42 ties up whatever military organisation member states could come up with to NATO. And Zemmour only said he would take France out of NATO’s integrated military command, hence keeping full membership with commitment to chapter five, which amounts to hand over to the neocon madman policy addicts the power to force the country -and the continent-into an absurd and deadly confrontation with Russia.
Your assertion that ” Zemmour is the only candidate who clearly wants to go out from OTAN ” is a laughable piece of propaganda all the more curious as Eric had just referred in a well documented post to François Asselineau who founded the Union Populaire Républicaine fifteen years ago to achieve frexit, namely to get out of the EU, the Euro and Nato, three aspects of the same geopolitical vassalage according to him.The point he’s always been making since then is that when you’re trapped or jailed the question is how to set yourself free, not which color or shade would fit the prison walls: political relevance can only stem from a national liberation movement seeking to restore the foundational social pact of the WW II CNR (Conseil National de la Résistance) written with a major comunist contribution and to revive the heart of De Gaulle’s constitution wich defines France as “une république sociale”, a social, even if not socialist, republic, based on powerful state-owned monopolies.
It is strange you could forget François Asselineau was the only candidate out of eleven, back in 2017 already, not to merely propose an alternative, but to expose it by disclosing to the general public its inescapable geo-political requirements and preconditions, being the only one to break free from the compelling frame-work imposed by the Us led Eu-Nato dominance complex, the other ten, whatever the beloved ideological packaging they would passionately wrap themselves in, trotskist, (neo) (fake) comunist, neo-liberal, “socialist” or “gaulist”, taking the same covert oath to go down the good old bla-bla circus road of subservient pride. This is how the “socialist” François Hollande had ended up implementing the same Eu treaties bound anti-social policies as Sarkozy he had defeated for nothing as a pitiful twin president, hence bringing about the many riots of his last year in power, this is how the provocative impeachment seeking Macron must go sparked the yellow vest movement etc… and this is how the Eu and Nato abiding Zemmour would ensure a home cooked civil war would break out in case the Us MIC failed to export his own to eastern Europe: self-destruction as the last possible act of sovereignty…Kind of French sixth column!
May be you were not born five years ago: congratulations for being so smart so young! Sure this time around you won’t miss Asselineau anymore!
En tant que français je dois dire que l’analyse de Ramin est assez correcte même si teintée par son point de vue marxiste ;).
As a French I have to say that I mostly agree with Ramin’s analysis although I am sympathetic to some of Zemmour’s talking points.
Zemmour is a literary man, a man of words, that’s his main advantage in that compared to the intellectual mediocrities a la Macron he seems like a towering figure. Someone who is still able to write meaningful speeches and carry them with conviction, while all the others just blurt out some boilerplate written by young ENA graduates.
However is ideology is a mishmash of naive Reaganite neoliberalism and souverainism which seems to have been hastily cobbled together. The core of Zemmour’s convictions revolve around the great replacement and the fragmentation of French society in separate cultural islands, and here it’s obvious he’s right. Some think it’s good (the globalists) some decry it. But the fact is there. The trouble comes when Zemmour has to assemble an all-encompassing program to run for presidency, and here it’s obvious that on economy he’s a neophyte and probably not more knowledgeable than the average quidam.
I think most people sense this, but the Zemmour vote seems to me driven mainly by rage and a nihilist desire, which I share and which is the reason why I’ll probably vote for him too. Don’t worry, the chances that he wins on the second round against Macron is exceedingly low (<0.1%) unless polls are massively wrong, it would be a 6- or 7-sigma event. There are still enough people attached to the statu quo. However when your choice is between Macron, the globalist scum who has directly threatened 6 million people and has made our life a hell for the last 2 years, and anyone else, you will take this anyone else if only to spite this insufferably haughty establishment.
There's a nugget of truth at the core of Zemmour's message. I think it's true that what's at stake here is whether France retains part of its old souverainist, independent soul, or whether we'll get fully absorbed into the globocap blob and become half-start-up nation, half touristic attraction populated with soulless, ahistorical drones.
Trouble is that, if Zemmour gets elected there's a high chance he does a Trump, i.e. fiscal presents to the 0.1% and nothing else, as he will be blocked by the massive deep state and the bloated public service which is at 99% against him.
Micron, first you say about Zemmour: “Don’t worry, the chances that he wins on the second round against Macron is exceedingly low (<0.1%) unless polls are massively wrong, Reminds me they said the same about Trumpeter winning against Killery (" it would be a 6- or 7-sigma event").
Then you say: "However when your choice is between Macron, the globalist scum …".
That's why I voted for Trump, a forced choice. Shrillery was a known Swamp Creature; but unknown Trumpleskin proved to be The Creature from the Black Lagoon.
” Glory to you Truckers of Canada for your sacrifices in the struggle for democracy and fundamental human rights to free thought & choice. May the Freedom Convoy grow to thousands of miles”.
Mandates, are Dictates imposed by the elites on society circumventing due process and democratic norms. The Canadian truckers demand the right to be allowed to be human beings instead of automations at the mercy of imbeciles. The elites & their army of robots on the other side use the anti-vaccine narrative as a diversionary tactics. The economic crisis of the past two years has been tough on everybody. The Canadian truckers, due to the nature of their job have had over exposure the negative side mandates . Hence the Freedom Convoy.
Below is my estimation of how the elites created crisis creation cycle has been running for the past two years
1) Fabricate a crises (war, economic ,health, social, political, etc.)
2)Spread it via politicians, MSM, various agents & spokespersons (false scientists, etc.)
3)Apply shock & awe force enabler to prepare the ground for the pseudo solution and magnify the crisis further
4)Formulate self-serving assumptions and publicly present them as facts to be followed by all.
5)Draw arbitrary dictates (out of the assumptions declared as facts) & legislate them as “Mandates”.
6)Demand compliance by use of force (police. military, etc.) ,legal system & Sanctions .
7)Loop back to step 1
The brave truckers of Canada have smelled the rat & are out for a kill. They need the support of all freedom loving people.
Those same truckers that support ukraine, that hate natives and immigrants.
The same immigrants that are also drive trucks, its not a freedom convoy. Its freedom to be nazi convoy.
My take from a maritimes dude.
Personally, I’m not thrilled about a presidential candidate who is having a baby with a mistress 35 years younger than he is.
People who think France’s dignity can be restored by such a person will be sorely disappointed.
In reference to Ramin’s mention of the crushing of the Paris Commune of 1870:
in “The Civil War in France” written in 1871, after an exhaustive analysis of the concrete historical events, Karl Marx denounced Thiers, the Frenchman who collaborated with the Prussians in the crushing of the Paris Commune of 1870, as follows:
“Despite his hypocritical homilies about the necessary liberties and his personal grudge against Louis Bonaparte, who had made a dupe of him, and kicked out parliamentarism – and, outside of its factitious atmosphere, the little man is conscious of withering into nothingness – he had a hand in all the infamies of the Second Empire, from the occupation of Rome by French troops to the war with Prussia, which he incited by his fierce invective against German unity – not as a cloak of Prussian despotism, but as an encroachment upon the vested right of France in German disunion. Fond of brandishing, with his dwarfish arms in the face of Europe, the sword of the first Napoleon, whose historical shoeblack he had become, his foreign policy always culminated in the utter humiliation of France – from the London convention of 1840 to the Paris capitulation of 1871, and the present civil war, where he hounds on the prisoners of Sedan and Metz against Paris by special permission of Bismarck.”
A few paragraphs later:
“A master in small state roguery, a virtuoso in perjury and treason, a craftsman in all the petty strategems, cunning devices, and base perfidies of parliamentary warfare; never scrupling, when out of office, to fan a revolution, and to stifle it in blood when at the helm of the state; with class prejudices standing him in the place of ideas, and vanity in the place of a heart; his private life as infamous as his public life is odious – even now, when playing the part of a French Sulla, he cannot help setting off the abomination of his deeds by the ridicule of his ostentation.”
Zemmour is there to replay the role & the script, in France, of Bernie Sanders in the 2016 US presidential elections. His assigned mission, from his tribe, is to reelect Maquereau, the Judeo-Zionist Rothshild “boy”, all good, all-purpose domestic servant.
Funny how Zemmour, like Macron, comes out of the woodwork within 1 year of an election. Funny how he is likely funded by the same organisation for the most part (CRIF). Funny how he is also one of the (((tribe))), as Macron was a Globalist Rothschild banker. Do we not see a potential issue here? Could it just be possible that although he says what many want to hear (as did Macron), that he could be a complete decoy and carry on the bidding of globalists?
Le Pen is a nationalist is the same spirit as Putin.
Hilter duped the German people and was a globalist pig claiming he was a nationalist.
He was illegitimate grandson of the Austria Rothschild head. Just as Macron and Merkel and BoJo is one of their underlings. Le Pen is nothing like that at all.
Germans sadly saw what the result was for following such a pig in the mass destruction between 1941-45.
The same type of internal destruction the past 2 years is also going on worldwide for following such swine.
All countries need a nationalist leader – including Germany – but they need the right kind of one to do great things and to be placed in the historical record as such.
France’s situation is different because of historical issues and the fact France’s economy is not as strong which has resulted in leftist voting lean the past century. And that is due to failed policies of the globalist French right under people like Macron.
But this time around those French voters in the center will see Le Pen as the only saviour to remove the evil Macronic forces and those of the wicked European Union elites.
Yesterday was Quatorze Juillet. Bastille day, to celebrate that historic occasion when the French army joined the French people for Liberte’, Egalite’, Fraternite’. Browsing the internet, I saw many images of the Army on the streets and of Chosen “Elus” on high — but very few images of people fraternizing in a spirit of Freedom and Equality.
Politics in France is no longer interesting.