- Ranska on ihan mielenkiintoinen maa ja kulttuuriltaan hieman erilainen kuin Suomi. Entisessä suurvallassa ei olla yhtä nöyriä kuin vaikka Suomessa, mikä näkyy tämän bändin videoista.
- Alla juttua myös Ranskan äärioikeiston näkemyksistä tulevian vaalien alla.
- Ranskan äärioikeisto on Pro-Russia ja hyvin Amerikkalais vastainen.
Front National saattaa voittaa vaalit, mikä tietäisi suuria muutoksia maahan.
Äärioikeistolainen Kansallinen rintama kipusi viime viikonlopun paikallisvaalien ensimmäisen kierroksen ykköseksi. Puolue valtasi 13 alueesta kuusi itselleen. Maahanmuuttoa, islamia ja Euroopan unionia vastustava puolue sai lisäpotkua Pariisin muutaman viikon takaisista terrori-iskuista.
Ranskassa ja maailmalla seurataankin nyt silmä tarkkana, miten puolue pärjää vaalien toisella kierroksella sunnuntaina. Jos puolue onnistuu, se voi muuttaa kunnolla Ranskan ja samalla koko Euroopan poliittista kenttää.
Marine Le Pen sai viime viikonlopun vaaleissa 40 prosenttia pohjoisen Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardien äänistä. Kuuden miljoonan asukkaan alue on Ranskan köyhin. Perinteisesti täällä on äänestetty vasemmistoa, mutta nyt työttömyyden ja köyhyyden kanssa painivat antavat äänensä Le Penille.
Marine Le Penin strategia päästä huipulle valtaamalla ensin aluehallinto on ollut menestyksekäs. Hän voi jopa onnistua siinä, missä hänen isänsä Jean-Marie Le Pen ei onnistunut koskaan: hän voi nousta Ranskan presidentiksi vuoden 2017 vaaleissa.
Tässä vielä Ranskan äärioikeiston kriitiikkiä nykyistä hallitusta kohtaan:
Firstly, we have to emphasize the degree to which French culture is shaped by a tiny politico-cultural minority, really a set of interconnected inbred cliques, who then dictate what are the ideological orthodoxies, fashions, and tastes for the whole country. If a small alien group, a hostile ethnic or plutocratic elite, were to get a commanding position in the network of cultural gatekeepers and producers, this would then naturally distort the entire development of the country.
Secondly, it is obvious that the entire media-cultural space in France is completely politicized. This is particularly true in the current Socialist Government, which is made up in majority of Freemasons, Jews, Zionists, and people of color. Consider some of the members of the “French” government:
- Prime Minister Manuel Valls: A Catalan immigrant, Freemason, and Zionist who is, quote, “by my wife eternally attached to Israel!”
- Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius: A Jew converted to Christianity, architect of austerity and permanent double-digit unemployment in the 1980s, and of the destruction of Syria today.
- Education Minister Najat Vallaud-Belkacem: A Moroccan dual national who has made sexual blank-slatism her flagship issue, mandating that boys play with dolls from the youngest age. I would guess she’d be stoned to death if she tried to push this in her home country.
- Justice Minister Christianne Taubira: A Black Guyanese, who had previously agitated for the independence of French Guyana. In 1999, she had protested crying the slogan “Guyana for the Guyanese” and in 2007 explained Guyanese unrest by saying: “We are at an identitarian turning point. Ethnic Guyanese have become a minority in their own land.” So, Taubira is both race-conscious and in solidarity with her people, but why is she the “French” minister of justice? Why are similarly patriotic Frenchmen (e.g., Jean-Marie Le Pen) and identitarians in contrast excluded from power? Taubira has made gay marriage and softening sentencing on her fellow people of color her signature issues.
- Minister of Economy Emmanuel Macron: A young gentile alumnus of the Rothschild Bank charged with making the French economy more “competitive.”
- European Commissioner for Economic Affairs Pierre Moscovici: Not strictly a French government position, this Romanian-origin Jew holds the important job in Brussels of enforcing the European Union’s deficit rules and ensuring all European states repay their debts (with interest of course).
- Minister of Culture Fleur Pellerin: An ethnic Korean who has publicly defended her ignorance of French culture by saying “I am not paid to read books.” Her most recent action has been to maintain politicized state subsidies for pseudo-subversive left-wing publications (Mediapart, Arrêt sur image . . . ) and cut off the same subsidies for right-wing publications (Rivarol, Valeurs actuelles, Minute).
Unfortunately, the FN does not really have any clear cultural doctrine. They would want French education to again promote French identity and knowledge of French history, and to ban protests in favor of illegal immigration. But there is little else. They do not speak of abolishing France’s censorship legislation, for fear this would be misportrayed (as in the case of Bruno Gollnisch) as “holocaust denial.” Le Pen has said she could conceivably make the Jewish quasi-nationalist pundit Éric Zemmour her minister of culture. While readers of The Culture of Critique may be shocked by this, Zemmour has promoted in the mainstream media a fairly constructive form of French nationalism and, especially, has condemned Judeo-centricity and the Shoah as “the official religion of the French Republic.” I do think nationalism will only be able to progress if it is no longer equated in public opinion — through the Pavlovian conditioning our cultural elites have created — with the real and imagined horrors of the Shoah.
Florian Philippot — Le Pen’s talented right-hand man, spin doctor, and technocrat — has been responsible perhaps more than anyone else for the FN’s shift towards an explicit civic nationalism that is economically on the left. For this and because of his overweening presence, he is resented by many of the old and not-so-old guard. Philippot is also said to be “very anti-Zionist” however, which suggests he may understand more than he lets on . . . .
The point is: Le Pen’s potential conquest of the Élysée Palace and the National Assembly would immeasurably transform the conditions for cultural struggle in France.
In a nationalist-ruled France, the debate would no longer be between homophile “Socialist” and race-baiting “conservative” advocates of the same economic/migratory borderlessness, multiculturalism, and globalism, in short, of the same destruction of the French nation and state. Rather, the debate would be between the pro-European Identitaires and the anti-globalist/anti-Zionist Égalité & Réconciliation.
It would be rough. A substantial percentage of the French people are not ready. The leftists will shriek “fascism” until they turn blue, and will find ample support in the United States and among rootless oligarchs like George Soros to agitate against the French national government. Judeo-American cultural influence, through Hollywood, the Ivy League universities, and the Anglo-American media, would also continue to be felt and would attempt to undermine the emerging national French culture. Conversely however — just as Michel Houellebecq, Alain Soral, and Dieudonné today have a certain international influence — so the new national French cultural-media complex would spread nationalist, identitarian, and pro-European culture abroad as well.