Features

Meet the intellectuals leading France to the right

‘Les nouveaux réactionnaires’ are causing furious discussion in a country that pays unique respect to public thinkers

29 October 2015

9:00 AM

29 October 2015

9:00 AM

When President de Gaulle was asked to authorise the criminal prosecution of Jean-Paul Sartre for civil disobedience during the Algerian war, he declined. ‘One does not lock up Voltaire,’ he added, unhistorically. In France, ‘public intellectuals’ have a quasi-constitutional status, so it’s not surprising that a furious bunfight has broken out over a handful of philosophers known as ‘les nouveaux réactionnaires’.

The new reactionaries do not see themselves as a group, but they defend a common point of view about the causes of France’s diminishing status and influence. They look back on a golden age that started with the French revolution and continued for nearly 200 years as France — driven by the republican principles of freedom, equality, brotherhood and the rights of man, plus anti-clericalism — pursued its worldwide ‘civilising mission’. Today the pressures of globalisation threaten France’s identity and a nation that once imposed its vision on the world is having to swallow ideas the very opposite of those it has always preached. The importance of ‘the French model’ is drilled into the nation’s schoolchildren daily. But in the view of these philosophers, ‘Anglo-Saxon’ political correctness (‘la bien-pensance’) has poisoned teacher-training courses, which have become ‘gulags of knowledge’. The new reactionaries are convinced that one of the cornerstones of French culture, ‘freedom of expression’, is dying. They reject ‘post-colonial guilt’ and are appalled by ‘cultural relativism’. To get down to the nitty-gritty, they take the view that France’s sovereignty is under threat from Arab immigration. Europe’s migration crisis has highlighted their fears, and the lip service that President Hollande pays to Angela Merkel’s refugee-quota system — widely unpopular in France — has further aided the reactionaries’ arguments.

A leading figure is the right-wing political journalist Éric Zemmour, who is Jewish and descended from pieds noirs (French citizens formerly living in the colony of Algeria). His book Le Suicide français, published last year, traces the decline of France since the death in 1970 of Charles de Gaulle and has enjoyed a huge success. Zemmour, who has in the past been prosecuted for racism, recently became a peak-time television star, taking the place of elected politicians whom he describes as ‘destructive and out of touch’. This month, a novel written by one of his supporters depicts Zemmour as a future president of France. The conceit began to look less extravagant when a national opinion poll showed that 12 per cent of the electorate welcomed the possibility.

That Zemmour should hold reactionary opinions is not surprising. He was once an adviser to ex-president Nicolas Sarkozy and is now associated with the Front National. But he has been joined by Alain Finkielkraut, an established feature of the nation’s political conversation for many years. Finkielkraut was until recently a professor at the École Polytechnique and is now a member of the Académie Française. In his recent book L’Identité malheureuse (‘Unhappy Identity’), he too attacked multiculturalism and he points out that his father, a Jewish refugee from Poland who became a French citizen, would never have told ethnic Frenchmen that he was ‘as French as they were’ — a refrain commonly heard from more recent immigrants. Finkielkraut defends the same point of view — despite the fact that his father was deported to Auschwitz by the wartime Pétain administration — and he is outraged by the refusal of many Muslim citizens to integrate and accept France’s traditional values.


Five years ago, under President Sarkozy, the government banned the wearing of the niqab (full-face veil) in public. Since then, 908 women have been cautioned by police, but none has been prosecuted, and some Muslim women have apparently taken to wearing the veil out of defiance rather than religious conviction. For the new reactionaries, the public display of the niqab is a red rag to a bull, further evidence of France’s cultural death and the decline in authority of its political leadership. Finkielkraut argues that since the politicians are no longer fit to govern, their role in defining and conducting debate must once again be assumed by intellectuals.

Another member of the band is the leftist Michel Onfray, a freelance philosopher. He is the son of Normandy peasant farmers who describes himself as an atheist and an anarchist and he would seem to have little in common with members of the Académie Française. But Onfray has recently entered the lists in defence of Finkielkraut in the name of ‘freedom of expression’ which he considers almost nonexistent in France. As a result of this intervention — which won him national media coverage — Onfray was savagely attacked by former comrades for ‘supporting the ideas of the National Front’. One even suggested he should be sent to a mental asylum — rather proving Onfray’s point.

Further fuel was added to the reactionaries’ fire by the distinguished maverick novelist Michel Houellebecq, whose latest title Soumission (‘Submission’) depicts a future France ruled by a Muslim president. Houellebecq belongs to no camp and has long regarded all French politicians as ‘cretins’, but his novel came out last January on the morning of the attack at the office of Charlie Hebdo. The sales campaign had to be abandoned, and Houellebecq, labelled ‘Islamophobic’, went into hiding under police protection. Soumission was nonetheless a bestseller.

For the new movement, political issues defined by the term ‘souverainisme’ — national sovereignty, migration, border controls, security, the constitution and cultural identity — are no longer extreme-right territory, they are also of legitimate concern to the left. For the traditional left, the opponents of the new reactionaries, the very term ‘national sovereignty’ is an insult. They look on ‘souverainisme’ in Europe as the mirror image of jihadism in the Muslim world. They denounce ‘populism’ and ‘xenophobia’ and any argument that might seem to support the Front National. But the violence of their counter-attack has led to accusations of ‘neo-Stalinism’ and ‘smear tactics’. A defence of the reactionaries is being led by the veteran political journalist Jean-François Kahn, founder of the down-market weekly news review Marianne. Kahn pointed out the illogicality in arguing that because the Front National highlights problems caused by mass immigration, anyone who accepts the existence of these problems is a supporter of the Front National. If the left continues to abandon causes adopted by the FN, he adds, all it will do is to give the extreme right an ever larger space in which to operate.

Writing in the left-wing daily Libération, Kahn went further and suggested that the left’s disastrous tactics were the main reason for the FN’s progress — a rise in support from 10 per cent in 2007 to 27 per cent today. Kahn is 77, and his reward for this insolence was ‘death by trolls’; a fake obituary posted on the internet just after his article appeared.

Meanwhile the ultimate cause of all this turmoil, Marine Le Pen, president of the Front National, is enjoying the spectacle. She continues to polish her party’s image, gradually transforming it from a despised extremist group into ‘a party like any other’. She is openly courting the Jewish vote, proclaiming her support for Israel and emphasising that she no longer has anything in common with her anti-Semitic father, Jean-Marie, founder of the party. While the rancid old monster calls Auschwitz ‘a detail’ of the second world war, Marine describes it as the ‘worst crime committed in the history of mankind’.

In next December’s regional elections Marine Le Pen expects the National Front to win control of the region of Picardy, which includes Calais, and of Provence, which includes Marseilles. In the run-up, the National Front’s favourite issues — crime, unemployment and immigration — are dominating the debate, and the more Le Pen’s opponents struggle to marginalise her, the more legitimate her party becomes.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • JOhn Mackie

    This is 54 minutes of riveting political theatre if your French is up to it. Zemmour is an absolute master. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SV4IK7yC56Y

    • sfin

      The left are the same, the world over…

      Shouting down the debate with irrelevant interruptions and a childish, lemon sucking disapproval of evident truths.

      Here in France, Marine Le Pen is on trial for a “hate crime”. She pointed out muslims praying in the street and said that France had been invaded by an alien culture.

      “Liberté”? Don’t make me laugh! Not even the leader of a political party which is leading in the polls can publicly proclaim the truth – much less an opinion.

      • Without prejudging the outcome of that case (not due until December) a precedent was set on the issue of free speech by an appeal court ruling in favour of a baker in Grasse (Google: ” Pat-a-cake, Pat-a-cake, Baker man, Bake that Grasse” for more details). Freedom of expression is certainly under threat in France thanks to unyielding pressure from Islamist extremists, post Charlie Hebdo fear, and France’s large Muslim population, but it is too soon to write it off. (Entirely agree on “hate crime” , an Orwellian and perverse leftist tool that deserves to be mercilessly attacked by those who support free speech).

        • sfin

          Yes I saw this case, but I don’t think they compare on two main levels:

          1) The “cake” case was ambiguous, at best. The baker successfully argued that the use of dark chocolate was a technical necessity and there were no other allusions to race (I think they were called “God and Goddess” weren’t they?)

          2) The baker was “the little guy” vs an organisation. Not only the little guy, but an artisan baker little guy. You know enough of the French mentality to see how that was going to turn out! I am no fan of FN (far too left wing for my taste) but Marine Le Pen is an establishment hate figure (she was famously not invited to the Charlie Hebdo rally, here in Paris) – I think ‘they’ are out to get her.

          • Malcolm Stevas

            I know people in France who might formerly have run a mile from the FN but who feel they are being driven inexorably toward Le Pen by the French Establishment’s cultural cowardice.

          • sfin

            Very true.

            It does annoy me, though, when the media refer to the FN as “far right”. Their economic policies are way to the left of even Le Parti Socialiste. They are a large state, collectivist party and are therefore on the far left of the political spectrum. I wouldn’t want to see the French get their country back – only for it to descend into a culturally pure, Stalinist hell.

            Eric Zemmour is that rare (but thankfully, growing) thing in France – a conservative.

          • Joe Long

            “They are a large state, collectivist party and are therefore on the far left of the political spectrum.”

            Hasn’t French economic policy always been dirigiste?

            They have always been keen on protectionism.

            British laissez-faire capitalism has completely undermined British identity.

            Where’s the pride in belonging to a country where pretty much everything is up for sale whether it be to Saudi despots or the Chinese Communist State?

            The rotten to the core political financial class have turned Britain into a raddled old globalist whore.

          • sfin

            Your last paragraph is telling and refers to the progressive corporatism of 1920’s USA, that Britain has now returned to under Blair, Brown and Cameron. Politics and Capitalism wedded together through schemes like PFI and tax credits, with money being king. “Third Way” politics isn’t new, it was tried and failed in the past.

            There is a difference between protectionism and state control of the means of production. Yes France has always been protectionist (and I agree that it’s something Britain could use more of) but the FN advocate a rerun of the Italian fascists of the 1940’s – “Everything in the state, nothing outside the state”. They are attractive because of the current, cultural invasion of Europe – but they would deliver totalitarianism if they got in.

          • Joe Long

            I don’t know whether that’s a fair characterisation of FN policy.

            I do know that we are not exactly spoilt for choice of effective leadership in either Britain, France or most of the rest of Europe. Viktor Orban is without doubt a shining light. We could do with another Cromwell.

          • sfin

            The FN are largely known, outside of of France, for only two policies – both of which are attractive to conservatives – namely, immigration and the EU. Conservatives (small ‘c’) would do well to examine all of their economic policies and large parts of their social policies and be careful what they wish for.

            You are quite correct, in my view, that Europe lacks leadership and has done for some time. In all areas of life, including politics, the art of leadership has been replaced by the science of management.

          • E.I.Cronin

            Agreed Joe. Thanks for this exchange. Like you I see a simple, hard choice which I mention to Malcolm above.

            In my country a FN/UKIP style party has launched itself and looks promising. Australians will complain bitterly about MC and Immigration policy but stop short of changing their vote. Parties and policies evolve and continually respond to circumstances – they would mature rapidly in government.

          • E.I.Cronin

            Sfin I don’t see any choice – you mention below conservatives should be wary of mistaking FN for their 2 most publicised policies, but I simple see no choice for the French. As Joe implies – either submit or vote FN. Malcolm criticises them elsewhere for being collectivist authoritarians but isn’t Hollande collectivist, authoritarian. Also a common complaint here is totalitarianism is being delivered by the EU?
            I wonder how much the bureaucracy, industry and real world politics would modify Marines hard left economic policies once in power?

          • sfin

            It’s a fair point – exchanging one form of totalitarianism for another…

            I suppose I should say, if we could turn the clock back and replace Islam with Judaism…would we vote for National Socialism? I don’t think so – and that is what FN is proposing.

            There is little choice in the EU, at the moment – in that you are correct. I fear dark times.

          • Malcolm Stevas

            Agree about the FN: just like our own BNP (though vastly more intelligent and professional and successful) they say some very sound things on immigration and cultural identity, but combine this with authoritarian, collectivist politics. Unacceptable to me, no matter how much I might sympathise with some of their ideas.

          • sfin

            That’s my position exactly!

          • Joe Long

            “Unacceptable to me, no matter how much I might sympathise with some of their ideas.”

            What would you have then, ever increasing colonisation and Islamisation?

            Surely the FN are the only game in town?

            Houellbecq put forward the scenario in Submission whereby the Muslim Brotherhood candidate become President in 2022 with the assistance of the Socialists and Conservatives – winning fairly narrowly against the FN.

            This didn’t seem entirely plausible for 2022 but 10 or 20 years afterwards might be a different kettle of fish.

          • Malcolm Stevas

            Voting into power the FN or the terminally dim BNP would be a crystal clear example of chucking out the baby with the bathwater.

          • Joe Long

            The future is Islamification then and the reduction to dhimmi status of the native people.

            There is already a two tier justice in operation here; none of the atrocities committed against grooming victims have ever been treated as racially motivated hate crimes, which they are

          • Malcolm Stevas

            I don’t accept that our only salvation from Islam is to vote for such Parties as the FN or BNP.

          • E.I.Cronin

            Where else could it possibly come from Malcolm? There is nowhere else. I don’t understand people’s reluctance to change their voting preference when the choice is stark. Vote nationalist or submit. I believe Joe is right.

            I don’t know anything about the BNP or it’s collapse but have been following FN closely and am an admirer of Marine (I comment to sfin below). The only other mechanism for a repeal of MC policy or immigration reform is a referendum. No major party would allow it, UKIP’s several elections away from being able to introduce legislation and opposition to Islam is in a minority. A sizable one, but a minority nonetheless.

          • Malcolm Stevas

            Thought I’d posted a lengthy reply to your perfectly fair points but it hasn’t appeared…

          • E.I.Cronin

            No problem Malcolm, you can never tell which terms consign you to Mod Limbo. Thanks for the exchange here, it’s an important topic.

          • Malcolm Stevas

            Yes. Possibly the most important topic facing us currently, though you wouldn’t believe it from the attitude of our political class.

          • E.I.Cronin

            In our upcoming elections I will be urging everyone I know to protest vote. Perhaps it doesn’t matter which alternative party people choose as long as the duopoly see their voter base threatened on the issue of immigration and MC policy. Disgusting lack of principles and loyalty on their part but that’s the reality of political expediency we have to work with isn’t it. I hope new parties do get off the ground and following the shift in Europe a promising group has launched in Australia, but even if they only win several seats the main point is elites get a clear message.

          • Wee Mental Davie

            Just for a wee sideline here. I know I’m down the education and social scale but here’s a wee thought. I might be wrong … probably. I’m rather worried about 2020. I have dark forebodings of a left wing coalition government forming as if by magic. One that takes everyone by an unsurprising surprise over the next few years. Imagine the SNP, the far left Labour party and all the other left leaning nut-jobs, coagulating into a cesspit of incompetence. With that lot in control, I could quite easily see us all being further caught up in this ongoing colonisation of mainland Europe directly via our open borders. A one way non returnable trip, into a quasi islamic nightmare controlled by Brussels (maybe), regardless of our EU in out vote result. The left are a direct threat to our country more than ever before, yet no one has the balls to stand up and say it officially. Even UKIP stops short of the truth for fear of a backlash and cries of islamonausea.

            With all the obvious evidence of these fake asylum seeking colonists, why is so little of this being presented in the media ? Today, we are told that the population of UK is expected to mushroom as a result of immigration, it only warranted a 20 second mention on news at 10, yet a whole section is regularly following the plight of the poor migrants. This is media manipulation and supression, supported by the government. It’s a disgrace and must stop.

            I’m not sure who the enemy is anymore but I do know who can stop all this dead and right now. Come on Dave. Back the British people and get us out of the EU or Nigel will take command and do it for you. We don’t want any more islamic colonists or migrants. We want to keep our British ways of life. Not some islamic compromise.

          • E.I.Cronin

            Thanks Wee Mental Davie, great post. And don’t worry, I slid off the social scale decades ago and never looked back 🙂

            Key phrase: ‘’The left are a direct threat to our country more than ever before, yet no one has the balls to stand up and say it officially’’. I’ve come to the same conclusion and most conservatives here seem to have clearly seen the danger for a long time. I believe the foundation for a religious civil war has been created and it may take a generation before exploding, but it’s inevitable. The regressive media here has been blatantly manipulating news for years now. Even when called on it they deploy all the usual evasive tactics. Ive been vacillating between conspiracy or stupidity as an explanation – I’ve come down in favour of stupidity and malice.

            We’re all anxious and fearful. The coalition government you mention could occur, why not? politics and events are completely unpredictable. But there is hope – as each crises unfolds criticism of progressive policy and leadership becomes louder and more persistent. The Orwellian rhetoric is wearing thin (did you check out
            the Generation Identitaire video? That’s the key – hitting back with strong, bold language) The more of us who start debating and confronting the easier it becomes for others.

            Australasia is heading in the same disastrous direction but you folks are in the thick of it. If it’s any consolation many of us are watching and thinking of you all – England is our parent culture. The UK, Australia and NZ are all islands – that might be our saving grace.

          • Wee Mental Davie

            I agree. Conspiracies usually fill the vacuum between the ears of the strange. The BBC are a disgrace regarding this migrant nonsense. What it shows is an organisation that must really hate the British people. Biased, bigoted and corrupt to the core, it’s time their plug was pulled.

            You say about more people debating these issues. The problem here in Scotland is the SNP. They have control of the government and any opposition on social media for example, is stifled and suppressed, usually by banning the outspoken one. No other political party will come close to challenging their power. There is no one to show the Scottish people, the damage to our country they will do with their immigration planning. They are all afraid of being negative and so the truth is a minor detail to be tackled later.

            Do you know that if you make an offensive remark about religion here, you can go to jail for 3 years. This law was brought in under the guise of Rangers – celtic football sectarian chanting and post match violence. This act of law was created with a huge input from Humza Yousaf, a muslim. The law is designed to protect islam in Scotland and not for the benefit of Rangers or celtic. This man, wants to import millions of muslims and no other political party will speak up regarding this issue, for fear of losing the immigrant vote. We are in big trouble here in Scotland. There is only one option for true Brits (regardless of colour) and that is UKIP.

            I would love to see a social media website set up for the sole purpose of exposing the SNP. One that has little moderation and tells it exactly how it is, which would be in direct contrast to our BBC.

          • E.I.Cronin

            That’s extremely disturbing. They know the threat of litigation, even if unsuccessful, is a huge deterrent to average citizens voicing their objections to Islam and immigration policy. I believe there’s a very little point lobbying any of the major parties and that grassroots activism that weakens their voter base is the only option we have.

          • goodsoldier

            I agree but don’t expect anything of Dave, the fashionista Leftist, and hope that Nigel will take command.

          • sfin

            I think we’re all, fundamentally, on the same side here Joe…

            It’s frustrating that there is no clear, conservative leadership on this issue – save UKIP, which has to combat, not only the MSM, but some lunatic power grabbers amongst its own membership…

            I sincerely believe that supporting parties like FN, and as Malcolm Stevas, rightly points out, the BNP, over this one issue, ultimately undermines our cause. It gives ammunition to the left and their childish cries of “racism” when the argument has always had nothing to do with, two dimensional, “race” and everything to do with, three dimensional “culture” (I find it deliciously ironic that the protagonists in the latest “race hate” videos against muslims were black Britons – watch the left tie themselves up in knots over that one!)

            Supporting individual policies doesn’t, necessarily, mean we should support the party.

          • Ray Spring

            Not so. Voting for the BNP in UK is the ultimate protest vote. If enough voters could use their brains and not be told who to vote for by the media, we should have a 10% BNP vote. Refugee boats would be sent to the Gulag the day following the 10% BNP vote. And the Gulag needs workers, who could be fed and housed for the whole time they felt it too dangerous to live in their own country. Australia has shown the way!

          • As people are in Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Sweden, Netherlands, Austria, Germany and elsewhere across the continent where similar parties are gaining ground, and even more so with Merkel’s migrant mayhem prompting backlash.

      • Frank

        One imagines that Marine is praying that the court locks her up. Of course the court won’t because the public reaction would be too severe.

        • sfin

          I hadn’t thought of that – but you you may not be far from the truth there!

  • WFB56

    “…‘Anglo-Saxon’ political correctness (‘la bien-pensance’) has poisoned teacher-training courses, which have become ‘gulags of knowledge’…..That Zemmour should hold reactionary opinions is not surprising….they take the view that France’s sovereignty is under threat from Arab immigration….”

    The tone throughout this piece is that somehow all of the views espoused by Zemmour are wrong and that “reactionary” opinion is somehow beyond the pale. The end result is something that is worthy of a young Corbyn acolyte and really nothing more than the acceptance of the failed orthodoxies of the multicultural world of many journalists and academics.

    • These people are not reactionaries – if anything they’re true liberals. The worse that could be said is they’re conservatives. ‘Reactionary’ has a very clear meaning. These intellectuals are nothing of the kind. This is a serious error in the article.

  • Here is Finkielkraut on October 2013 after publishing a book in which he defends French culture and identity against Islam’s “militant and more sectarian forces”. On Islamaphobia: “For such people the Islamaphobe is anyone who seeks to oblige Muslims to submit to the same laws as everyone else in the Republic, because in the name of combating anti-Muslim ‘racism’ these people submit the Republic to the demands of Islam. True Islamaphobia consists in saying ‘your religion is incompatible with our identity, you should not be here’. Such attitudes must be fought with all our energy but we must also insist, in terms of basic rules of hospitality, on respect for our values and our rules.”
    On the question of whether the changing demographic makeup of France makes it inevitable that the country’s culture and identity will also change, he said: “Without doubt. But one cannot just change things like that. From the moment that one admits that there is a French civilisation, that one has accepted its heritage and that one seeks to make a contribution to that, there is a commitment. For instance a recent statement by the secretary general of the Committee against Islamaphobia set off in exactly the opposite direction. This man said ‘No one in this country has the right to define for us what is French identity’. As it happens no immigrant from an earlier generation of immigrants would have dreamed of proffering such a profoundly ungrateful statement.… A passport is not of itself a creator of a national identity we need to introduce a distinction between the universe of rights and the sensibility of reality.” (http://www.french-news-online.com/wordpress/?p=31226)

    • mohdanga

      “True Islamaphobia consists in saying ‘your religion is incompatible with our identity, you should not be here’” How is this “Islamophobic”??? Stating a fact is not Islamophobic!!! One should be able to say whatever they want about someone’s religion or culture!

      • E.I.Cronin

        I did a double-take too… Finkielkraut said that??? Sacre Bleu!

  • Malcolm Stevas

    Just as it’s late in the day for this country to regain control of its borders plus its cultural identity, so in France it will be an uphill struggle to do anything about that “Arab immigration” – and its consequences. Whether in Paris (e.g. the Gare du Nord metro, like Beirut…) or the Midi, it’s all too obvious that France has the largest Muslim population in Europe. I don’t know any French philosophers but I do know ordinary French people, and they’re not very happy with multiculturalism despite France’s efforts to impose “civis Gallus (?) sum”…

    • Guest 1

      It is time we stopped using the terms ‘migration’ and ‘immigration’; what we in Europe are experiencing is colonisation. We are faced with a situation where major cities are no longer inhabited by Europeans, and where the school age population is over one third non-European. The problem is our ‘leaders’, the elites in universities and the media, and the ideas of borderless globalisation. Time to resist, as some are in France: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4e7n7g1xAM

      • Guest 1

        BBC reports ONS prediction of an additional 4.4 million added to UK (read, in effect, England), over the next decade: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34666382 And they’re not English…

      • E.I.Cronin

        Thank you – the others videos appear to be untitled but this clip is superb. Trust the French to deliver a message this blunt, stubborn and confident. Yes fighting back with language is half the battle, I will be using colonisation from now on.

        • Guest 1

          Good! Yes, there is no doubt now, and today’s ONS predictions confirm it. England, Europe, we are being colonised by the South and, in particular, by the Arab-Muslim world; the latter possessing a self-confident, universalist ideology that threatens us.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        Excellent video. Stirs the soul. In time it will be here also.

        • Guest 1

          Let’s hope it will be in time – in France and here.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        It seems the moderators are out in force.
        I’ll say again, this stirs the soul. I hope this sentiment makes it across the channel.

        • Guest 1

          I got your original comment – it contained nothing that anyone could objct to. Yes, I agree. Good luck to them!

      • The_Missing_Think

        “The problem is our ‘leaders’,” [of political parties… perhaps?].
        _____

        I’ve made the same point many times – you have to vote Nationalist, to remain a Nation.

        It’s that simple. (too simple for some).

        The French are voting FN, but the clever ‘English’ are still seething hatred at their political equivalent.

        Time to control your ‘class’ pride and seething hatred folks… whilst there’s still time!

        • Itinerant

          But of you vote ‘Nationalist’ in Scotland, you get fake multikultist
          ‘Nationalists’, who support colonisation and promote Islamist into power, who agitate for more immigrants from Palestine, Syria and the Middle East in general.
          A ‘nationalist’ party that has overseen record immigration numbers, to the degree- it is predicted there will be 9 immigrants for every newborn in Scotland.

          Time for a real Nationalist party in Scotland.

          • The_Missing_Think

            Agreed, it’s sink or swim time, no more fake piety signalling thank you, people have to conform to our creator’s laws of planetary survival, or pay the price.

      • NickG

        The French call it – the great replacement – Le Grand Remplacement.

    • Neil Saunders

      There’s another phrase that conveys the precise meaning of “uphill struggle” in this context, and it chills me to the marrow even to contemplate it: civil war.

      • Malcolm Stevas

        Yes, in my gloomier moments I contemplate the possibility, remote though I find it. Not sure the English retain their traditional grit, though, seem to have lost their self respect, will to win etc.

        • Neil Saunders

          On current trends, it’ll kick off somewhere in “occupied” Europe before too long, Malcolm.

      • LittleRedRidingHood

        Pains me to say but it is inevitable.

  • Joe Long

    I read Submission about a month ago

    Houellbecq has of course been labelled racist, misogynistic and all the rest of it by the usual suspects.

    He contends that a liberalism, which has lost all confidence in itself and is racked by self doubt and guilt, and where moreover women prioritise careers over child rearing, cannot compete with a highly patriarchal system, which has not such doubts, and which is determined to take control of the educational system in order to pass on its fixed in stone values to the next generation.

    Liberalism loses because it simply gets outbred.

    I’d have thought that was unarguable.

    Interestingly, perhaps I ordered the book on Amazon

    It was delayed and I gathered from the tracking system that it had been bouncing around for a few days.

    Eventually Amazon sent me an email claiming the book couldn’t be delivered citing some generic reasons, none of which remotely applied.

    I had to buy it from Waterstones, a little anecdote which no doubt wouldn’t trouble lefty multi-culti idiots one little bit.

    • Dr Bock

      I too ordered my copy from Amazon, was told it might be delivered the week following its publication, received it the Friday/same day it was published.

      • Joe Long

        It was the first time that I’ve ever ordered anything from Amazon which wasn’t delivered

  • Blazeaway

    A very similar cultural battle is brewing here – and we see the same tactics employed by our own politically correct bien pensants.
    Good luck to France.

    • Neil Saunders

      It’s been “brewing here” for decades; now, to vary the metaphor, it’s coming to boiling point.

  • Wolfgang Amadeus

    The media needs to acknowledge and accept that the old notions of Left and Right, Liberal and Conservative, are no longer really relevant. The issue of religion, and specifically islam, is one that has demolished the traditional political partition, where we have some self-professed liberals defending an ultra-conservative belief system and brandishing other self-professed liberals who disagree with them as fascists.

    • Terry Field

      The media is American. It wishes to destroy the European competitive potential. It is highly successful in this to date.

      • Neil Saunders

        It’s American-based, but strictly speaking it’s transnational (or “globalist”); it has destroyed the U.S., too.

      • Sunshine Sux

        Funny. Here I was thinking that the extreme Islamo-phile European media was now owned by Qatar, Saudi and the UAE….

  • Dr Bock

    Law of unintended consequences, who knew that elements of the gay vote would look askance at reactionary Islam, a reactionary Islam appeased by the ostensibly liberal-left, and decide that a reformist right under Marine Le Pen, and certainly not the father, might be a more welcoming place for those valuing traditional French republican tenets which might serve the individual well? Personally I’m not that alarmed at the prospect of Marine entering the Elysee, assuming things don’t go 2002 for her, owing to the separation of powers, the worst she’d be able to do, taking a dim view of her, is live in a nice house, make ‘racist’ speeches, assuming that’s defined from a Guardianiste perspective, and show up the centrist parties by exhibiting the overlap over foreign and defence policy, it’s not like the French are going to give her a majority in both houses too. I read the new Houellebecq novel the day it was published here in the UK, it’s one of culture’s great recent ironies, given his history with Islam, and the Charlie Hebdo massacre, that he makes peace with Islam for its social conservatism, if he damns any group in that novel it’s the centrist establishment, who’ve lost any feel for governing and are terrified of the boogie man of Le Penism, and so cede the future to Islamism, at, blackly comically, the expense of feminism, though with no mention of what that might mean for gay rights.

    • Joe Long

      It read like a despairing capitulation, certainly plenty of Quislings around

      • Dr Bock

        Depends on your perspective, if we accept that Houellebecq is a social conservative, which I think his criticisms of the effect of liberal economics on personal relationships, make him, then he sees in Islam a vehicle for restoring those aspects of the old order that can be restored, in order for things to stay the same things have to change. Amusingly the liberal establishment allow this to come into being in the novel, at the expense of at least one of their neurotic touchstones, radical feminism, though Houellebecq doesn’t dwell on the darker side of the new order he envisages in the book.

        • Joe Long

          But which old order would Islam restore?

          Medieval pre-Revolutionary France? The Dark Ages? Worse than the Dark Ages?

          It wasn’t just radical feminism that French liberal Quisling academia jettisoned. One of the rewards and incentives for signing up to the new order was polygamy – they were the grateful recepients of arranged marriages to very young girls; a respectable version of Rotherham and Rochdale.

          It is inconceivable that Houellbecq regards this as anything other than appalling, and the book serves as a warning against the descent into a new and hideous Dark Age

          • Dr Bock

            I don’t think it’s at all inconceivable, from his rather privileged position he’s perfectly open to the possibilities it would allow, vis his traditional, sexual preoccupations. Being a cynic, I’m not sure many men would necessarily regret moving from traditional Judaeo-Christian marriage to polygamy, or at least those as sexually preoccupied as Houellebecq’s protagonists anyway. Whilst, to invoke Ballard, maybe a bout of atavism would be, in a sense, healthy, playing games with the old psychopathologies, quite when precisely any individual’s chosen barbarism hails from is an altogether second order question, one best left to the aesthetes.

          • Joe Long

            “I don’t think it’s at all inconceivable, from his rather privileged position he’s perfectly open to the possibilities it would allow, vis his traditional, sexual preoccupations.”

            I don’t think he occupies a privileged position as such. He never went to university, he has the status of public intellectual in France as a result of his writings which many have found to be of merit.

            The main character in the book is on the way to a rather uncomfortable accommodation but there’s nothing to suggest that the author’s views have changed since 2002

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/1407582/Writer-defends-right-to-call-Islam-stupid.html

          • Dr Bock

            I guess we’ll have to just agree to disagree.

    • Frank

      Come on Houellebecq is dire, you cannot avoid the impression that he will say anything to epater les bourgeois.

      • Dr Bock

        What’s wrong with shocking the bourgeoisie? Personally I don’t need to read Humanist fairy stories, I prefer deeply unsympathetic characters in fact, far more realistic.

      • Esmee Phillips

        Houllebecq is a clapped-out sensation seeker. Trolling as literature.

        • MacGuffin

          You couldn’t even begin to understand the writings of Michel Houellebecq, you bigoted hateful troll.

          • Esmee Phillips

            Bet I could, sweetheart.

    • artemis in france

      Exactly. It amazes me that so many “celebrities” approve of mass Muslim immigration into the UK when they are either gay themselves, have played gay characters or, at least, inhabit a world full of gays. Their ignorance of the true nature of Islam would be comical if it weren’t so galling.

      • bigbutchboy

        Take heart at what’s happening on the ground. More and more of my gay friends are waking up, realising through the fog of PC Leftist misinformation, that freedom and democracy are the only guarantors of emancipation and participation for gay people. We are becoming more aware of the need to be more patriotic as part of this. The litmus test is to ask ‘is this policy pro or anti-freedom?’ If it’s the latter, then it’s probably not good for gay people. The Left have nothing to say about freedom, indeed they are very uncomfortable talking about it. Don’t be fooled by the shrill shouting of the gay Left, they are loud but they are not typical any more. We are laughing at them.

  • turriseburnea

    Why ‘reactionaries’?

    • E.I.Cronin

      I know, yet another linguistic absurdity to add to the pc collection. Anyone with a mild opposition to terrorism is a ‘reactionary’. It’s as meaningless as all the other slurs and easy to laugh off.

      An ABC journalist ended her interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali by calling her a ‘wounded reactionary’. How is that for hypocrisy – an armchair activist with allegedly liberal values insulting a courageous woman who has suffered genital mutilation by ultra-conservative religious extremists and lives 24/7 under police protection for defending freedom of speech, religion and expression.

      • bigbutchboy

        Ali is incredibly potent for all the reasons you describe, hence the harshness of the insult. She appeared on Newsnight a while ago and cut through the usual BS by spelling out very succinctly the fact that Islam is at war with Western Europe, whether WE wanted to be or not. Evan Davis was dumbfounded, a rabbit caught in the headlights, and said nothing. He did however ensure that she didn’t get another chance to speak.

        • E.I.Cronin

          ‘Rabbit in the headlights’ 🙂 The torment of not being able to play the racist card sends them into nerve paralysis. She’s a great woman and is giving everything to save the West from itself. I feel sorry for her having to repeat the same msg ad nauseam to regressives who don’t want to listen – but we all hear her.

  • SCS

    The most important thing is to re-evangelize France. Without the Catholic faith, the French are lost and the Western civilization is lost forever. Without faith we cannot fight back!

    • Yazzle

      You’re right and I agree, and I’m an atheist…

      • Esmee Phillips

        Who will be the new Martel? Are there any Franks in France?

        • Terry Field

          Johnny Halliday.

          • Esmee Phillips

            He’s Belgian.

          • Terry Field

            A perfect candidate, then.

    • Terry Field

      The collapse of European self-confidence after 1945 has either run its course, or there is no recovery to be had, and the civilisation is at an end.

    • I’m not sure that’s the answer. Europe’s fate rests with the left waking up eventually. Now, they’re really stupid, we know that, but there will come a point when even they cannot ignore the cognitive dissonance in their brains, as their progressive values start to crumble around them. Many will still find a way to blame the West and the horrible right wingers, but there will come a point when it’s undeniable.
      Far too late by that point of course.

      • SCS

        Yes, most of the left will eventually wake up, but then what? Unless they reinvigorate they faith in Christ, they are doomed and will eventually accept the death cult of Islam.

      • Terry Field

        ‘progressive values’. Prostitution of language by misattributing words like ‘progressive’ is nauseating. Syndicalist socialist prejudice is in no sense ‘progressive’.

  • SCS

    This is problematic:

    “The new reactionaries do not see themselves as a group, but they defend a common point of view about the causes of France’s diminishing status and influence. They look back on a golden age that started with the French revolution and continued for nearly 200 years as France — driven by the republican principles of freedom, equality, brotherhood and the rights of man, plus anti-clericalism — pursued its worldwide ‘civilising mission’.”

    They admire the revolution, equality, egalitarianism and anti-clericalism?

    That’s Jacobinism, with whom the Neocons have bern repeatedly (and accurately) compared. These aren’t “reactionaries” in the true sense of the term. If anything they are French progressive Jews who are alarmed by the surge in Muslim immigration.

    • Esmee Phillips

      Monarchy, Catholic Christianity the Frenchness of blood and soil- not the flimsy pretensions and utopian dreams of revolutionaries- are the only doctrine worthy of the name of conservative, and able to save the Hexagon.

      The man to honour is Jean Raspail, who saw it all coming.

      • …. and recently (aged 90) rehabilitated and vindicated via a Le Point interview where he said he was happy that the vilification against him had now stopped. He warned that the events in Europe — that he described as ‘invasion’ rather than ‘migration’ — were just the beginning: “the situation we are living through today is nothing compared to what awaits us in 2050”.

        • Terry Field

          indeed so. The population projections for Africa -sub-sharan and the Middle East identify an ADDITIONAL 1,400,000,000 over the next 60 years. At the same time desertification and state collapse will become universal.
          I expect 200 million will migrate to the European landmass by the end of my children’s lives.
          Such numbers will be unstoppable.
          Like the wildebeest migration in the plains of `East Africa, they will just move as a body.

      • Terry Field

        No.
        Ratatouille and his excellent cooking will save the hex.

      • mortsnerd

        Precisely. How the author could mix up the statist proto-Leninist and natural-born killers the Jacobins with French conservatives is astonishing.

  • Frank

    The French pay lip-service to their intellectuals but ignore them in reality. It is an immensely conservative society and you only have to look at the number of attacks on mosques to realise that.
    If you drive around the countryside, you will se a lot of graffiti saying “if you don’t like it, leave”. This probably applies to a lot of the intellectuals mentioned in the article, but no civilised French person actually says it. It comes out in support for the FN.

    • Terry Field

      Grandstanding?

    • Le suicide francais was a bestseller, and it certainly is influencing people. It is not available in English, but if you have goodish French I recommend buying it. It is a brilliantly written but completely cogent and erudite piece of polemic charting the decline of France year by by from the 1960s. Immigration is only a small, though controversial, part of it. It also looks at French insecurity vis a vis the US, its landmark movies, even its football team–all are tied into the theme of decline. Anybody seeking to understand modern France from the inside should read this book. I found it a revelation, even after having lived there. I hope a translation becomes available.

      • Frank

        Thank you. You do realise do you that it is virtually mandatory for smart French people to buy the hot book of the day, which they then don’t bother reading. So the fact that this unpleasant sh*t got a bestseller in France is not, in itself, a huge recommendation. Zemmour’s defense of Vichy is absurd as plenty of French jews got shipped off to Germany.

      • chrysostomos

        Deutschland Shafft Sich Ab was also an eye-opener and caused a stir in its time but no one seems to talk about it any more.

      • John P Hughes

        Thank you for this. A companion book which I would recommend is ‘1962: L’Année prodigieuse’ by Bertrand le Gendre. See the summary and cover page on Amazon.fr at
        http://www.amazon.fr/1962-lann%C3%A9e-prodigieuse-Bertrand-Gendre/dp/220711161X
        This is written in journalist’s French and rather easy to read. It describes the year when France was at its height, entering the 1960s and at the height of the ‘Trentes glorieuses’ years which lasted to about 1975. 1962 is generally called the year the ‘Modern World’ began in Britain and America as well – this is fine description of why it was true in France too.
        If Eric Zemmour’s ‘Le suicide français’ is as good as ‘1962: L’année prodigieuse’ it will be worth buying to understand what has gone wrong. Le Gendre ends his book with a comparison between 1962 and 2012 and finds that despite the great material advances in 50 years some real qualities and values have been lost.

  • Innit Bruv

    The likes of Zemmour and Finkielkraut would do well to remember what happened to their French coreligionists
    in WWII before flirting with the far right.

    • Ray Spring

      Rubbish. The ‘far right’ are the old center ground. We have to defend our Nation State and our European Ethnicity.

    • Terry Field

      A stupid comment. The world does not run in a circle. The right and the left are not as they were, because the world is not as it was.
      Marxism and its idiotic pseudo-science that falsely identifies eternal conditions is the lie you use as a presupposition for your infantile and anti-semitic remark.

      • Innit Bruv

        Totally irrelevant to France.
        The world may have changed since WWII, mindsets, however, don’t necessarily change in a matter of decades. Especially when centuries-old prejudices are involved. You don’t seem to know much about France or the French.
        On what do you base your imbecilic assertion that this is an anti-semitic remark?

    • Sunshine Sux

      Muslims are the New Nazis, and the fascist left that supports them.
      They even gas human beings. Their own brothers and sisters, mind you – probably because there isn’t anybody else left to gas.

      • Kennybhoy

        Nope. On this Innit Bruv is correct. There are no “New Nazis”. The old ones never really went away. They just kept their heid’s doon and bided their time. You yersel’ correctly identified and described them no’ far above as “…the usual Nazis, coming here to blame Joos…”. The FN is stuffed wae’ the bastards.

      • Innit Bruv

        Very profound.

    • Cobbett

      Remind us then.

  • I don’t see why sovereignty is rightwing or reactionary. It’s the core of democracy: the people alone decide and their decision is final and cannot be bypassed by some tonsured clergy. In France, this was the core of the Third Republic debates, when Zola battled against (real) reactionaries. Today the tonsured clergy don’t appeal to God and the infallible Pope. They appeal to ‘multiculturalism’, ‘global justice’, ‘international law’, and ‘siding with the oppressed’ – all codenames for the threatened supremacy of the priesthood and their loathing for their own people.

    • Mary Ann

      You mean like tax credits, Cameron says he won’t change them in the run up to the election, then goes back on his word, then has the changes rejected by an unelected upper house, very democratic.

  • Hagen vanTronje

    The French miss big Charles because he gave them purpose and his policy of a strong France gave the French the pride they now lack.

  • Terry Field

    The new thinking is overdue. Equality does not mean levelled homogeneity. It means equal opportunity to achieve. They are correct in rejecting socialist poison. It is not the definition of French civilisation; rather socialism is its corrupter.
    The migration of peoples and environmental collapse, however, is not a manageable force.
    Nobody can create a formal to survive these times intact.
    To not be destroyed requires emotional schizophrenia to a high degree – the protection of those within the border, and the quite observation of the death of most of those outside it.
    Just the issue we are only starting to grapple with, but as yet unconsciously.

    • Joe Long

      “To not be destroyed requires emotional schizophrenia to a high degree – the protection of those within the border, and the quite observation of the death of most of those outside it.”

      Well who is the unbalanced one, Viktor Orban or Frau Merkel?

      Out of sight, out of mind

      An old saying and a wise one

    • chrysostomos

      Rather than elevate those who strive, the left prefers to grease the ladders of high achievers so that they are on an equal footing with their less able peers.

      • Terry Field

        WD40
        Dangerous.

        • chrysostomos

          Littoral-ly.

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          Especially when you drop a can in one of those burning oil drums.

  • Grace Ironwood

    In time? Probably not.
    One thing the French do have going for them – that the Anglo’s don’t – is their national habit of Revolution.
    Come the caliphate, the British may simply form a queue.

  • Sunshine Sux

    I’m missing the usual Nazis, coming here to blame Joos, for over 50 Million Muslims in Europe..

    • Kennybhoy

      Le Pen’s FN is chock full o’ sic creatures. They are her core support and maist o’ her activists… 🙁

    • Dave Roberts

      Where did you last see that on here?

    • Cobbett

      Do shut up.

      • Sunshine Sux

        I will absolutely not!

        • Cobbett

          OOOOH.

    • chrysostomos

      So you deny that in the main it has been Jewish intellectuals and journalists who have pushed for multiculturalism, mass immigration from third world countries and maintained a double-standard whereby white, predominantly Christian or once Christian countries are shamed and emotionally blackmailed into accepting these aliens while non-Christian, non-white countries are under no such obligation?

      If you do deny it then you are either gravely misinformed or a malicious agent.

      • Richard

        It has not been Jews “in the main”. There have been far more non-Jews who have propagated this idea.

        • Bruce Lewis

          Right, but it is almost universally supported by the very powerful Jews of the media and of academia.

          • Richard

            I think you have to be Leftie to be in the media and academia these days. It is a self-selecting group, and they simply shun those who aren’t Leftie. I can count non-Leftie people in the media and academia on one hand. It is an appalling situation.

        • chrysostomos

          And as a proportion of the population? Or is this strictly by the numbers?

          I’ll leave this here too but I am sure you will find some reason to fault it that has nothing to do with the provenance of its citations or gist of its argument but because it’s “racist” or “antisemitic”.

          http://islamversuseurope.blogspot.hu/2013/12/jewish-involvement-in-diversity-agenda.html

          • Richard

            Jews tend to be very prominent in their field, and so are visible. The Left uses them as poster boys, or at least used to, until they become “establishment”. Now it uses Muslims. All polls I have ever seen point to Jews having the same voting patterns as white non-Jews: they are split along the same lines. To say that all Jews feel a certain way would be like saying that Benedict Cumberbatch and the luvvies represent all Brits. Look, for instance, at Thatcher’s government. There were lots of Jews there.

          • chrysostomos

            But that doesn’t change the fact that Jews seem to be pushing for the mass migration of non-whites into white ancestral homelands.

            Was it not Jews who pushed for hate speech laws and holocaust denial to be outlawed?

            I personally am not a holocaust denier but I think silly ideas should be out in the open and criticised rather than criminalised which, in a strange way, gives them somewhat of a legitimacy (at least in the minds of conspiracy theorists).

      • sidor

        Do you mean that de Gaulle who initiated mass immigration of Arabs was a Jewish intellectual? Amazing!

        • chrysostomos

          What a glib, asinine comment that serves no purpose other than to score cheap points.

          I mean the de Gaulle who said: “We are after all a white European people with Greek and Latin culture and Christian religion…Have you seen the Muslims with their turbans and jellabas? The Arabs are Arab and the French are French. Do you think that French society could absorb ten millions Muslims who will soon be twenty million? My village would no longer be called Colombey-les-Deux-Eglises (Colombey-two-churches) but Colombey-les-Deux-Mosquées (C-two-mosques)

          Jews also push for hate speech laws and criminalisation of free speech. Even you must admit that’s a little sinister?

          • sidor

            I asked about what he did, not about what he said. And you didn’t answer: was he a Jewish intellectual?

          • chrysostomos

            You know the answer to that question; and you did indeed ask about what he did but not why he did it therefore your comment is pathetic and petty, designed as nothing more than to garner cheap points as I said before.

  • Paul Lamarra

    I am afraid Calais is not in Picardy but in Nord-Pas-Calais.

    • runningdog

      Do not be afraid. Rejoice in your certainty.

    • John P Hughes

      Until the end of 2015. A new and controversial regional council structure has been decided on by Hollande, which reduces Regions from the 22 current regions that began under Pompidou; and it manages to merge Picardie and Nord-Pas-de-Calais. Causing arguments between Amiens and Lille as to where the main offices should be located. Marine Le Pen is planning what she can capture of the new larger regional councils.

      • Mary Ann

        If we loose the referendum I expect the French government will kick all these people on to the boats and trains and let us deal with them, after all, if we are not in the EU why should they bother.

        • Jackthesmilingblack

          That would be “lose”. Loose is something that’s wobbly.

          • EUSSR 4 All!

            You; screws …

    • Terry Field

      It is unpleasant, wherever it is located.

      • Paul Lamarra

        Yes but the inference is that le pen win because of the situation in Calais. She looks as if she will win in Picardy but not in Calais.

  • jim

    They’d better hurry up.

  • Johnny Foreigner

    The Left has to adopt the issues presented by the Right? The reason that Europe and North America is where it is today is because of the Liberal Progressive/Cultural Marxist Left.
    For a reversal or even a temporary push-back, there has to be a revolution in social thinking, because the group think is firmly established throughout the West’s establishment & institutions.

  • Kennybhoy

    “She is openly courting the Jewish vote, proclaiming her support for Israel and emphasising that she no longer has anything in common with her anti-Semitic father…”

    Aye right!

    • jim

      So we should let ourselves be swamped by afro-arab-islamic immigrants just to prove we’re not anti-semitic?

      • Esmee Phillips

        Arabs are semites.

      • Kennybhoy

        ‘At last one came running, and told them all was lost: that the powers of darkness had besieged the Heavenly Mansions, that Odin was to die, and evil triumph.

        “I have been grossly deceived,” cried the virtuous person.

        “All is lost now,” said the priest.

        “I wonder if it is too late to make it up with the devil?” said the virtuous person.

        “Oh, I hope not,” said the priest. “And at any rate we can but try. But what are you doing with your axe?” says he to the rover.

        “I am off to die with Odin,” said the rover.’

        – Faith, Half Faith and No Faith At All by

        Robert Louis Stevenson

    • Cobbett

      Waste of time…leave them to the Muzzies.

      • Richard

        Israel, or the French?

        • Cobbett

          Er, read the quote I was replying to.

          • Richard

            Well, “they” could be the French politician to whom the quote referred (in which case it would be the French), or it could have been Israel, for which she was proclaiming support. Both are mentioned in the quote, so either could have been the subject of your comment

          • Cobbett

            Bloody Hell….Jews and Israel as it is in the quote I was replying to…no mention of the French.

  • sidor

    There is no “left” or “right” in the French politics. The ruling bureaucracy simply entertains public by organising these shows to keep the electorate busy.

    • chrysostomos

      Yes, the terms “left” and “right” are merely convenient labels with which the ruling classes can divide the dirty, unwashed masses and prevent them from rising up against them. Really, the difference is one between freedom/liberty and conformity/slavery.

      • goodsoldier

        Hillary has been anointed by the Holy Trinity, the media, the Democrats and the Republicans to be the next President. She is guaranteed to preserve the corruption and conformity.

        • sidor

          But in France nobody actually cares who is going to be the next president since it doesn’t change the policy direction by one minute of angle. The people are voting, and the bureaucracy is ruling, and these two processes are completely decoupled. Everyone is happy.

    • goodsoldier

      Same in the U.S. and the Britain.

      • sidor

        Not really. Neither US nor Britain have ever reached the level of a perfect police state that France has been since Richelieu. The French omnipotent monolith bureaucracy is unique and can only be compared with the Chinese one.

        • goodsoldier

          Thanks for your informative response.

  • John P Hughes

    The recent move of some French Jews to Britain because of growing anti-semitism was reported over the last two years. As in most press reports this was somewhat exaggerated – French Jews like other educated French people have come to England for better career prospects, and can go home at weekends on Eurostar whenever they want to.

    The trend among British Jews towards voting Conservative – which was given original impetus by Margaret Thatcher and most recently a further push since 2010 because of Labour and LibDem tendency to be anti-Israel and pro-Muslim – ought to be matched by French Jews voting for the right next time. If the Presidential candidate in 2017 is Alain Juppé or François Fillon, and the right (or Gaullists if they still call themselves that) state that they will adopt the same hard approach to anti-semitism that Theresa May has here, and a generally supportive policy towards Israel similar to David Cameron’s, its candidate should get the vote of the community in France. Whether the Front National can draw many Jews to itself yet is less likely: at least not for another 10 years and only after Jean-Marie Le Pen is no longer alive.

  • John P Hughes

    What stands out in Patrick Marnham’s valuable article is that General de Gaulle seems to have got it right. He had a low opinion of French politicians – from his time in the French Army staff in the 1930s, through watching the Third Republic collapse in 1940, his experience in 1945-46 as Prime Minister, his Rassemblement movement of 1947-52, and the gradual political (but not economic) collapse of the Fourth Republic, caused by the war in Algeria, until he came back to power in 1958. After he retired in April 1969 he is said to have watched them messing things up again and warned privately that without him everything would go back to how it had been. His two periods when he could really command – leading the Free French 1940-45, and as Prime Minister (for a short time) and then President, 1958-69, were when the French political malaise was avoided. (This would be the General’s view…)
    The next round of articles and books following those described in this article will be ones that look at what de Gaulle did for France and whether France needs a de Gaulle again! If so, no one knows who it might be, just as de Gaulle was unknown until the historic Appel du 18 juin 1940.

    • NickG

      His two periods when he could really command – leading the Free French 1940-45, and as Prime Minister (for a short time) and then President, 1958-69, were when the French political malaise was avoided.

      Not really, 40 to 45 France became a de-facto Axis power. French forces regularly bombed Gibraltar and Malta, opposed Allied landing in North Africa – operation Torch, and Madagascar – operation Ironclad. This as well as collaborating in rounding up Jews and providing more troops to serve in Wehrmacht field grey than they ever did in khaki.

      The fact that De Gaul – a colonel when the French capitulated was sponsored by the Allies as a figurehead and spun as a great liberator doesn’t alter these facts.

      • John P Hughes

        De Gaulle was head of the Free French Government in Exile 1940-44 (though he based himself in Algiers not London during part of 1943). The exiled politicians who joined him conducted the business of the government well – all the planning for postwar France was done then – and the political malaise of the Third Republic was not seen among his Ministers based in London.
        What Vichy got up to is another story entirely as all the histories show. France was liberated in 1944 not 45. De Gaulle is spelt wrong. He had a General’s rank in May 1940, though he was promoted only after the war began.

        • NickG

          All fair and all besides the point… that France was a de facto Axis power from it’s capitulation to the ousting of the Vichy regime by the Allied invasions in Normandy – operation Overlord and the largely forgotten operation Dragoon – the Allied invasion of the South.

          French Vichy forces operated until 1945, they were, for instance armed French troops operating with the Japs in French Indochina until 45.

          De Gaulle was promoted to Brigadier – a one star rank – as a result of his fighting in the futile battle for France.

          .

          • EasyStreet

            I think it’s a bit offside to say something is “besides the point” on someone else’s very well-argued post. John was very clear in his original post that de Gaulle led the Free French, not the French, from 40-44; it was you that took the discussion away from that into Vichy. A good thread though.

          • NickG

            Go back and read what I responded to.

            I specifically responded to – and quoted – the point that “French political malaise was avoided,” in the period “1940-45,” which, given the perfidious nature of Vichy France as an Axis power, is, I posit, something of a stretch.

            I stand by my arguments, and the evidence put forward in support. Simply because if fighting for the Axis side and collaborating in the deporting 75,000 to the death camps doesn’t engender feelings of malaise, that is to say feelings of ‘discomfort, illness, and unease’; then not much will!

          • Jackthesmilingblack

            Could manage without the racial slurs, Nick.
            Jack, the Japan Alps Brit

          • NickG

            Vichy a racial slur?

            Who’d have thunk!

          • NickG

            Vichy is only a racial slur if you take it as short for ‘cheese eating surrender monkeys’, which I guess it essentially is! It’s 70 years after WW2 so nothing to get overwrought over.

            But even then, not all Frogs in WW2 were Vichy collaborators with the Hun and Nips, many served honourably and bravely with the Allies, including in the Commandos.

            The French resistance is over rated though. Many turned out to be perfidious collaborators with the Boche.

  • Francisco F.

    The left has a history of infiltrating right of the territories … I just want to make sure you know who is really right and who is a fiction ( Marxist / socialist / communist / politically correct – and other demons … )

  • Tom

    Just back from a holiday in France. Went over to Marseille. Genuinely shocking. I went with my middle eastern girlfriend (who came to Britain as an asylum seeker when she was a child..) The more, ahem, ‘multicultural’ parts of the city certainly did not take well to the sight of a white guy hand in hand with an Asian woman. At one point a group of men threw a brick at us from a building. My girlfriend was just wearing normal summer clothes, but after all the stares and comments she decided to go back to the hotel and change into jumper and jeans. Never going there again!

    • Daffy Duck

      It is no different in certain parts of Britain. Birmingham has a big problem. But lets keep living in denial.

      • TrulyDisqusted

        The foreign office advises against even visiting Egypt at this moment in time, let alone electing to live there.

        Seems your safety is only assured if you are BP or Tony Blair and only as long as Britain’s police make no attempt to arrest Egyptian junta leader Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi during a state visit in November – or all commercial deals are off.

    • Norman Bates

      Sounds like they were just celebrating diversity

  • borisbadenovisback

    “While the rancid old monster calls Auschwitz ‘a detail’ of the second world war, Marine describes it as the ‘worst crime committed in the history of mankind’.”

    It is always good to see such “objectivity” in journalism though it seems, unfortunately, that Marine has overlooked the 40-odd million corpses produced by the Gulags, which, according to Solzhenitsyn, were superintended by Russian j ews. If the ethnic circumstances were reversed, reparations would be in order, wouldn’t they?

  • Cornelius Bonkers

    As usual, Houellbecq has cracked it in his new satire. Apart from (as usual) being very funny, it shows how the French left will support ANY nutty cause which is against nationalism. In the book, with the support of the socialists the Muslim Party and its charismatic leader come to power, and immediately slash the size of the state, return women to the kitchen and cut their education, make everybody work and pay their taxes, and insist on the central role of the family. Well, serves the socialists right I say…

    • Muttley

      I’m glad you enjoyed Soumission too. I thought it was brilliant and all too credible. When it happens, that’s the way it will happen. The only discussion I’ve heard of it was between three dreadful lefties on the BBC who naturally hated it, even though they clearly hadn’t grasped the full import of it.

      • Cornelius Bonkers

        Yo Muttley,
        Is the discussion on YouTube? I’d like to see the lefties competing for points in their hatred for MH. It’s said that MH sells millions of books but I know NO ONE who will admit to reading them. How odd! Perhaps there is a special “samizdat” reading group that I could join?

        • Muttley

          I think the discussion was on Front Row on Radio 4, and the only participant I remember was Liz Forgan. But they all hated the book and hated Houellebecq. Liz Forgan claimed to have studied A Rebours in her youth and hated that too, which was laughable because she clearly had not understood a word of either novel.

          • Cornelius Bonkers

            Sounds very BBC. A relative worked there, and the place is truly W1A leftie nutz…

  • lift_the_toilet_seat

    Multi-culturalism was invented by Jewish intellectuals to make them feel happy in Christian host nations. Now like the neo-con projects in Africa, Middle East and Mesopotamia it’s all gone wrong for them. It’s difficult to keep up.

    I’m beginning to see why Pope Benedict resigned. Francis should join him as should his successor straight after his election and so on and so on. They represent the future of Europe and used to be called the Benedictines who, at one time, saved our civilization. They will do so again.

  • “Meet the intellectuals leading France to the right”

    Then why haven’t these [reactionary] ‘intellectuals’ alerted the globe to the fraudulent collapse of the USSR, as the following illustrates…

    The following is a discovery I made in April regarding the fake collapse of the USSR, and what that fraudulent collapse proves about the institutions of the West…

    When Soviet citizens were liberated from up to 74 years of horrific Marxist oppression on December 26, 1991 there were ZERO celebrations throughout the USSR, proving (1) the ‘collapse’ of the USSR is a strategic ruse; and (2) the political parties of the West were already co-opted by Marxists,* otherwise the USSR (and East Bloc nations) couldn’t have gotten away with the ruse.

    ZERO celebrations, as the The Atlantic article inadvertently informs us…

    http://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2011/12/20-years-since-the-fall-of-the-soviet-union/100214/

    Notice, however, the Kremlin staged anti-government demonstrations that took place in Russia (and other Soviet republics) in the years immediately preceding the ‘collapse’, yet ZERO celebrations after the ‘collapse’!

    For more on this discovery see my blog…

    https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/

    The above means that the so-called ‘War on Terror’ is an operation being carried out by the Marxist co-opted governments of the West in alliance with the USSR and other Communist nations, the purpose being to (1) destroy the prominence of the West in the eyes of the world, where the West is seen (i) invading nations without cause; (ii) causing chaos around the globe; and (iii) killing over one-million civilians and boasting of torture; (2) close off non-Russian supplies of oil for export, thereby increasing the price of oil, the higher price allowing oil exporting Russia to maintain economic stability while she modernizes and increases her military forces; (3) destroy the United States Armed Forces via the never-ending ‘War on Terror’; the ultimate purpose of the aforementioned to (4) bring about the demise of the United States in the world, opening up a political void to be filled by a new pan-national entity composed of Europe and Russia (replacing the European Union), a union ‘From the Atlantic to Vladivostok’; which will (5) see the end of NATO.

    Now you know how Bolshevik Russia survived in 1917; how the West ‘lost’ China to the Communists in 1949; why the Eisenhower administration turned a deaf ear to the anti-Communist Hungarian uprising in 1956; why the Eisenhower administration in 1959 was indifferent to the Castro brothers’ Communist fidelity, actually used the CIA to overthrow the Batista government; why the Nixon administration abandoned Taiwan for Communist China, and signed treaties/provided economic aid to the USSR; why the Nixon administration refused to tell the American People that over 50% of North Vietnamese NVA regiments were actually Chinese People’s Liberation Army soldiers (attired in NVA uniforms, and proving that the Sino/Soviet Split was a ruse, as KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn told the West back in 1962), thereby (1) ensuring the Vietnam War would be lost; (2) destroying the prominence of the United States abroad and at home; (3) breeding distrust between the American people and their government; and (4) securing Communist victories in Southeast Asia. Working in the background within the political parties of the United States and Great Britain were Marxist agents doing their best to (1) ensure the survival of Communist nations when they popped up; and (2) sabotage any policies that would bring down a Communist nation. That’s why after the fake collapses of the East Bloc nations and USSR there was no mandatory Western verification process to ensure the Communists weren’t still in control.

    Now you know why not one political party in the West requested verification of the collapse of the USSR, and the media failed to alert your attention to this fact, including the ‘alternative’ media. When determining whether the ‘former’ USSR is complying with arms control treaties, what does the United States do to confirm compliance? Right, the United States sends into the ‘former’ USSR investigative teams to VERIFY compliance, yet when it’s the fate of the West that’s at stake should the collapse of the USSR be a ruse, what does the United States do to confirm the collapse? Nothing!

    The fraudulent ‘collapse’ of the USSR (and East Bloc) couldn’t have been pulled off until both political parties in the United States (and political parties elsewhere in the West) were co-opted by Marxists, which explains why verification of the ‘collapse’ was never undertaken by the West, such verification being (1) a natural administrative procedure (since the USSR wasn’t occupied by Western military forces); and (2) necessary for the survival of the West. Recall President Reagan’s favorite phrase, “Trust, but verify”.

    It gets worse–the ‘freed’ Soviets and West also never (1) de-Communized the Soviet Armed Forces of its Communist Party officer corps, which was 90% officered by Communist Party members; and (2) arrested/de-mobilized the 6-million vigilantes that assisted the Soviet Union’s Ministry of the Interior and police control the populations of the larger cities during the period of ‘Perestroika’ (1986-1991)!

    There can be no collapse of the USSR (or East Bloc nations) without…

    Verification, De-Communization and De-mobilization.

    The West never verified the collapse of the USSR because no collapse occurred, since if a real collapse had occurred the West would have verified it, since the survival of the West depends on verification. Conversely, this proves that the political parties of the West were co-opted by Marxists long before the fraudulent collapse of the USSR, since the survival of the West depends on verification.

    Conclusion:

    The West will form new political parties where candidates are vetted for Marxist ideology, the use of the polygraph to be an important tool for such vetting. Then the West can finally liberate the globe of vanguard Communism.

    ————————-

    * The failed socialist inspired and controlled pan-European revolutions that swept the continent in 1848(1) taught Marxists and socialists a powerful lesson, that lesson being they couldn’t win overtly,(2) so they adopted the tactic of infiltration of the West’s political parties/institutions. In the case of the United States…(continue reading at DNotice)…

    https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/now-you-see-me-now-you-don-t

  • Stephen Powell

    1914, 1939, 2015… This is the third Collective Social Psychosis in Europe in barely over a century. Why do Europeans seek only to destroy themselves? It is such a beautiful civilization and people.

  • Sten vs Bren

    “Meet the intellectuals leading France to the right”

    Oh, Jesus Christ; no, thank you.

    Talk about a triple whammy.

    • Eoin_macdonnachai

      Thinkers don’t lead countries to the right or left… events do.

  • knocke

    The Algerian war ended 1962; the incident with Sartre was six years later. And de Gaulle
    pardoned Sartre, he didn’t “decline” a prosecution: the president of France can’t interfere in a judicial process.

    That “the pressures of globalisation threaten France’s identity” is, indeed, a tenet of the Front National; it is hardly an important motor for the names the article refers to. It is not what your reporter terms the “Arab immigration” they fear: it’s the Muslim one.

    Eric Zemmour “defines” himself as a Jewish Berber, hardly as a *pied noir*. Alain Fienkelkraut, in contrast, refers to his parents’ background as Polish-Jewish and sometimes uses this to illustrate how those earlier immigrants integrated in France (for some reason, your reporter does not
    mention that neither Michel Onfray nor Michel Houellebecq is Jewish).

    Finally, how can your reporter state that “the ultimate cause of all this” is Marine Le Pen? Isn’t the “ultimate cause” rather the malaise experienced by La France profonde?

  • Muttley

    He’s right about Anglo-Saxon political correctness. It is the root of all evil.

Close