French Politics Is Built Around the Principle of Stopping Marine Le Pen Becoming President

Editor’s note: An interesting and possibly important development in French politics is the possible presidential candidacy of Éric Zemmour, a Jewish conservative media figure. TOO readers may recall Guillaume Durocher’s article on Zemmour from 2015 where he noted:

Zemmour, who is not a recent convert to French nationalism, has been both the most prominent mainstream pundit arguing for conservatism and patriotism, and has to some degree been increasingly marginalized while still maintaining a major audience. He was removed from a talk show on the France 2 public TV channel in 2011 to move on to the more marginal regional channel, Paris Première. He has occasionally been sued by (de facto Jewish) “anti-racist” groups (for example, for arguing that a majority of drug dealers are Black or Arab). In January 2014, the Nouvel Observateur, the leading center-left magazine, equated Zemmour with Soral and Dieudonné under the title “Hatred.” Most recently, he was fired from a talk show on i-Télé (a secondary digital TV channel) for giving an interview to an Italian newspaper which was interpreted as advocating the deportation of French Muslims. In fact, he pointed out that Muslims could be evicted during an ethnic civil war, such conflict being exceedingly common in human history. Zemmour sees such a war in France as likely in the long-term.

Zemmour is walking a fine line and is by no means “burned out” with the establishment. He continues to be employed by RTL radio and the conservative newspaper Le Figaro. In addition, the controversy re-boosted his book Le suicide français back to the #1 spot of the Amazon best-seller list. Many mainstream figures, including those opposed to him politically, such as the leftists Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Daniel Cohn-Bendit, protested i-Télé’s decision to fire him as censorship.

It is very tempting to argue that Zemmour is a “kosher nationalist” whose candidacy would be used to derail the hopes of Marine Le Pen. As Durocher notes, there are major problems for politicians not approved by the French Jewish community: “French Identitarian writer Anne Kling has argued that anti-immigration books have tended to be ignored unless they are kosher. She notes that the best-seller on crime and immigration, La France Orange mécanique, was promoted by “right-wing and ultra-right-wing Zionist” Jews and that the book’s author was represented in court by Gilles-William Goldnadel, a Franco-Israeli dual national close to the Likud party,  Franco-Jewish neoconservative networks thus find it in their interest to promote books and ideas hostile to Islamic immigration.”

Durocher gives several scenarios in which a candidate like Zemmour would conform to Jewish interests:

One possible outcome would be for the center-right conservative party to become a genuinely anti-immigration party or possibly have FN participation in a coalition government (and possibly an outright FN presidential victory, although I wouldn’t bank on that before 2022 at the earliest).

This is only possible if the French Jewish community, on some level, accepts it. This may reflect in fact the optimum outcome for them: To not completely Islamize/Africanize France, but to have a multiracial country in which European-French remain the majority, with Jews as a privileged group, particularly over-represented in the oligarchy and media, and with politicians particularly sensitive to its concerns. This, it seems to me, would be optimal for French Jews, but, as we’ve already seen, Jews often pursue their ideological fervor even to the point of self-destructiveness, so the rational outcome is not necessarily the most likely. It is not clear that they would be temperamentally capable of maintaining a stable equilibrium, even one which was in their favor.

Axios presents the results of a recent small survey of 1,310 French citizens; Oct. 1-4, 2021

Emmanuel Macron 24%
Eric Zemmour 17
Marine Le Pen 15
Xavier Bertrand 13
Jean-Luc Mélenchon 11

And as Axios notes:

A split in the far-right vote could provide an opening for a candidate like Xavier Bertrand, who is seeking the nomination of the center-right Republicans.

The Harris poll gives Macron the slimmest of margins (51% to 49%) in a hypothetical runoff with Bertrand, and slightly larger leads against Le Pen (53% to 47%) and Zemmour (55% to 45%).

So Durocher’s scenario of the center-right benefiting from a Zemmour candidacy may come true (Zemmour hasn’t announced that he is running). But what is quite clear is that the Jewish community remains a power in France and is quite unlikely to support Le Pen.

Another issue is Covid policy. Macron has opted for a very strict vaccine policy which has led to protests and will likely sway some voters.

Over the weekend [July, 2021], more than 100,000 people took to the streets to decry French President Emmanuel Macron’s tough new rules that require proof of vaccination or a negative test to enter cafes, restaurants, churches, trains, shopping centers, cinemas, sports stadiums and many other public places. Two vaccination centers were also targeted by vandals. … some French venues that hold more than 50 people will start asking people to show so-called digital “health passes” that certify a person’s vaccination status. Macron has also made it mandatory for all health workers to get vaccinated. … Macron’s draconian approach to vaccines may end up hurting him as he starts his campaign for reelection next April.

Daily Mail article (September 27) shows why the establishment would fear Le Pen in the April, 2022 election and use Zemmour as a way to derail her candidacy. Macron’s popularity is slipping, and vaccine policy and his pro-EU stance are issues:

Public dissatisfaction has been compounded by [Macron’s] bungled vaccine programme, that saw him brazenly claiming the AstraZeneca jab was only ‘quasi-effective’ before quickly backtracking amid poor uptake among the sceptical public.

The voters disdain for the EU has increased, leaving Macron more isolated as Le Pen gains ground.

Impatience with the president has been fuelled not just by the glacial vaccine roll-out but also by his apparent contradictions of scientific advice, with rivals referring to him as a ‘Napoleon’ and accusing the president of believing that he is an epidemiologist.

Adding to his woes, voting intentions for Le Pen’s party have not been this positive since her father Jean-Marie Le Pen’s campaign in 2002, when he reached the second round of the presidential election.

The right-wing party is ranking ahead of any other party in France among the 25-34 age group, who have faced unemployment and soaring costs of student loans.

Many of the younger age groups had already turned against Macron in the Yellow Vest protests of 2018, the pandemic only hardening their positions.

On the other hand, Marine Le Pen recently called the health pass “a disproportionate interference with [our] liberty” and promised that she would be a “president of French liberties.” On the EU, Le Pen  has “toned the [anti-EU] rhetoric down to try and win over more voters.”

Below is an article by Daniel Barge reposted with permission from Affirmative Right. As with Durocher, there is a real possibility that Zemmour could derail Marine Le Pen’s candidacy.


Charlie Hebdo cartoon showing Zemmour with
the Le Pens as concentration camp guards 

I don’t know who Éric Zemmour is or what his appeal to French people is. To get a true flavour of the guy I would probably have to learn French, which is never going to happen. But I can infer that he talks a great game, and makes plenty of good points. But those are mere details, and details are generally irrelevant. What is important is the big picture.

What is obvious, however, is that France has a Presidential election next year, and it would be extremely awkward for the governing elites if someone like Marine Le Pen won.

The way the election is structured is that there are a couple of rounds, with the final round being a run off between the two leading candidates. Last time it was the clearly astroturfed Macron vs Le Pen in the final, with Macron winning 66% to 34%.

The reason Macron won was because he was a “centrist” with almost total media support, who was able to take most of the votes to his Left as well as many Cuckservatives to his right. While he got 95% of voters describing themselves as “Left-wing” and 91% of voters describing themselves as “rather Left-wing,” Le Pen interestingly got almost a quarter or voters describing themselves as “Very left-wing.”

Since then, Le Pen has been making moves to break out of the “far-right extremist” framing imposed on her, and has made further inroads both to Leftist and Centrist voters.
For years now, in head-to-head polls with Macron she has been in the mid 40s, sometimes narrowing the gap to just 6 points. As we know, polls grossly under-count populist Right figures, so the gap may be much narrower or even inverted. Also, it has to be borne in mind that Le Pen’s support, which is socially unvalidated and constantly demonised by the media, is much harder than Macron’s, after all, his wishy-washy centrism does not inspire much passionate support anywhere.
So, from this we see that the macro-data was all pointing to Le Pen having a much better chance of beating Macron in 2022. Now, suddenly we are hearing about this “new” nationalist meteor, Éric Zemmour. Marine Le Pen’s own father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, now in his 90s, is said to be backing him.
From a quick “catch-up” article in Axios:
A far-right firebrand is shaking up the French presidential election and, with six months to go, has pulled into second in the polls.

Why it matters: This race had long seemed on course for a rematch between President Emmanuel Macron, now an unpopular incumbent, and far-right leader Marine Le Pen. But it’s Le Pen who’s now facing a major threat on her right flank.

Driving the news: Éric Zemmour, a writer and TV pundit sometimes compared to Tucker Carlson, is second in the latest Harris Interactive poll — a crucial benchmark, as the top two finishers will enter a runoff. Never before has a candidate jumped so quickly in the polls, pollster Antoine Gautier told AFP.

Zemmour — who was convicted in 2009 of inciting racial hatred and is an advocate of the “Great Replacement” theory popular among white supremacists — has yet to enter the race, but took a leave of absence from the French equivalent of Fox News.

I won’t comment on his Jewishness, but it’s clear that Zemmour is an effective communicator who talks in a way that strikes a chord with ordinary French voters, but why is he pushing himself forward as a potential candidate, especially now? Remember, details are irrelevant. It is the bigger picture that is important.
Zemmour and Le Pen

There are three reasonable possibilities of what will happen with Zemmour, all of them negative for the populist Right:

  1. He crashes and burns, whereupon his lack of purchase with Right-wing voters is attributed to “anti-Semitism” and used to smear Le Pen as a “Nazi” again, scaring some voters to cling to Macron. An old trick that seems to keep on working.
  2. He does well, whereupon Le Pen’s bloc is split down the middle, allowing someone else — a bland Centre-Leftist or Centre-Rightist — to push Le Pen and Zemmour down to 3rd and 4th spot, and thus set up a “safe” final round for the Establishment.
  3. He does very well, whereupon he faces off against Macron in the final round and somehow manages to lose.
The idea that Zemmour goes all the way and wins the Presidency seems a little far-fetched but not impossible. However, this can safely be set aside for the moment.

So, to summarize, what are we looking at here?

In 2017 Le Pen does well for a Right-wing Populist but is defeated in the final round to an astroturfed Macron. By 2021 President Astroturf is looking shop-worn and jaded, while Le Pen continues to build a solid challenge. Suddenly, out of nowhere, Zemmour is unleashed, his most obvious purpose apparently being to stop Le Pen winning again. Conclusion: he’s a spoiler candidate.

What we are seeing here, once again, is the central principle around which contemporary French politics is built: namely stopping Marine Le Pen becoming President.

Is this part of the “shadow war,” which Colin Liddell and others allude to, that is being fought out between the West and the rising “ChiRus” powers of the East, with Le Pen weaponised to destablise the West while Zemmour is a French Deep State countermove? Or do the elites just genuinely dislike Le Pen, and think that their version of Pan-European and Eurabian multiculturalism is the way forward?

Perfect timing: France’s Tucker Carlson
Daniel Barge writes for Affirmative Right. 
46 replies
    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      Thanks for the link. Reading this, however, was admittedly a trial for someone (viz., moi-même) whose French vocabulary is optimized for reading Giraudoux and Alain-Fournier rather than up-to-date political journalese.

      One thing that seems to be largely absent from Beaumont’s analysis of Marine’s failings is specificity. The closest he comes to it is in quoting Dominique Reynié, who blames the public’s loss of interest in Le Pen (i.e., vis-à-vis Zemmour) on general wear and tear, on her being a victim of overfamiliarity, and on the “euphemization of her message.” But how could any sentient French adult—let alone the editor of a publication whose founders were unrepentant Pétainists, royalists, anti-republicans, and courageous opponents of the (((hard-core communists))) and revanchists who had moved quickly to take control of France immediately upon liberation and damn near succeeded—think for a second that the Jew Zemmour is anything but a guy who is lying through his teeth about being opposed to immigration and everything else associated with the French Right, whether the Catholic or the anti-Catholic variety? His talk now may sound less euphemistic, but anyone who hasn’t been bought off should recognize a Trojan Horse when he sees one.

      I would welcome reading anything you care to add.

  1. Robert Maune
    Robert Maune says:

    I think the central premise is wrong; the Front National was created to split the Right vote and keep ‘Socialists’ in power. It is a party designed to always come second in the Presidential elections, and is not remotely credible as a party of government. Anyone wishing to know more should really explore the curious political and financial background of Francois Mitterrand and his long and close friendship with Jean-Marie LePen. French politics is a very twisted game: 100% power and 0% principals.

    • Rae West
      Rae West says:

      People interested in the big picture might like the work of Frenchman (or men, women, whatever) nicknamed hexzane527. I found him by chance investigating views of Hitler as one of many, not operating on his own. Hexzane thinks WW3 will be arranged by Jews to establish Greater Israel, with the sides juggled to cause eventual approval of Israel. This would involve manipulating Muslims in France. He thinks Brexit was arranged to make two states in Europe Muslim, but not Britain, as part of the formation of sides in war – something Jews are experts at. It’s the only convincing prediction of ww3 I’ve ever seen.
      https://big-lies.org/hexzane527/world-war-3-explained.html
      I put it on my site some years ago. Naturally there’s been no discussion.

    • Poupon Marx
      Poupon Marx says:

      Yes, I saw a debate between Macron and Le Pen. Even though it is impressionistic, I was impressed with how Le Pen kept “holding her punches”. She paused frequently and then a watered down statement came out. At one point, Macron made a comment that was ad hominem, implying her hatred for a class of people (“ray schism”) and she went into defensive mode.

      These tactics work. Larry King, in the stream of asking Billy Graham some neutral background questions, popped this one on poor Billy, “What do you have to say about you on tape asking Richard Nixon, ‘What do we do about the Jews?'”. Billy collapsed and folded like a deck chair on a cruise ship in a hurricane. He stammered, groveled, looked down, and begged forgiveness like a child caught stealing some candy. It was disgusting and sickening. A wimp. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpvxtf0vTdw

      Billy Graham Cracker was a weak, delusory wimp and sloppy thinker. Add shallow to these descriptors. He knew what Jews were doing to this country, said so, but then at 1:54 minutes on>. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oIo5g594SQ
      he weasels out. Jesus either wept or cursed him.

      Several commenters on here prescribe a “muscular Protestantism or Catholicism” as a vehicle to escape our terminal graveyard spiral. An airplane stalls and starts to rotate uncontrollably until in crashes into the earth. The reason for this is that no air is passing along its control surfaces. This is the metaphor for turning the rancid product, e.g., vinegar from once wine. There is no redemption or salvation in Christianity. As practiced by the extremely devout Middle East Christians, this is the exemption. But this involves veritable spirituality and is closer to Buddhism and other Eastern Religions and Teachings.

      Some of us witnessed Jimmy Carter, Mr. Peanut, pointedly asking Gerald Ford about the “Iron Block” of Eastern Europe. It looked entirely like it was pre-rehearsed and scripted. He popped it out of nowhere. Ford stammered and said-flush faced-that there was no Soviet domination. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfyL4uQVJLw

      All of these sucker punches were either carefully crafted by psyops advisors or there was a “fix” for the conservative/traditional guest or debater to “take a dive in the X round”.

      When you see “missed opportunities” as for example Senate Committee questions for government appointees coming even from “Repugnicans”, “Right Wing”, etc, etc that are weak, limpid, timid, and retiring, than the presumption must be that this is deliberate capitulation from fear.

  2. Tim Folke
    Tim Folke says:

    This Éric Zemmour is very creepy looking. The last photo says it all. Just my opinion, but would you buy a car from this man?

    I’m starting to understand why there is the big push to wear masks.

    • JM
      JM says:

      “This Éric Zemmour is very creepy looking.”

      @Tim Folke
      Yes, he looks like he stepped right out of Der Stürmer. As reported, he’s like an archetypal Controlled Opposition.

      The article is interesting in that it reports widespread support for Le Pen from a significant group within the “Far Left”. Where else can a patriot turn? Indeed, where else can a supporter of Liberty turn? The once enormous French Communist Party (PCF) – which paid serious attention to “immigration” through its huge influence in the municipal governments – was infiltrated and taken over a long time ago. The remnants of the Far Left are mere tools of the Global-Fascism of the Neo-Liberal World Order.

  3. Edward Harris
    Edward Harris says:

    In my humble opinion Le Pen has about as much chance of becoming the President of France as la Plume de ma Tante has.
    In the British election of 1979 the BNP fielded over 300 candidates. The election was held on a Thursday and the previous Saturday night 7 conservative MP’s spent the evening buggering each other at a brothel in Holland Park West London.
    Every newspaper in Fleet St. knew but none published this. Camera men from the D.E. were waiting in the bushes but were told not to take any pictures. Jimmy Saville’s friend Mrs. Thatcher became PM.
    I suppose France is just as rotten as the UK.
    During a Cabinet meeting in Parisfrance De Gaulle announced that the Anglo Saxons were about to invade Normandy, the Germans Belgium and the Russians Southern France.
    France had to fire its missiles at the USSR and the USA.
    A friend of my brother said that, having been with the French Army in 1940, he was leaving immediately to hang bedsheets from every window and the flagpole and broadcast in English, German and Russian “I surrender “.
    De Gaull was handed over to the Doctors:
    They came and took him away.
    They filed away the notes, and put on long white coats.
    They came and took him away.
    If the missiles were already on their way it was hoped that the Russians and Americans would understand that accidents do happen.
    Why anyone would want to be president of anywhere (includng Haiti) is beyond me.

    • Poupon Marx
      Poupon Marx says:

      The REAL problem is, has been, and always has been the “one man one vote deception and fiction of good outcomes”.

      But suppose we did live in a democracy in which all votes were equal. It would fail anyway scientists say, for People Aren’t Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish.

      The democratic process relies on the assumption that citizens (the majority of them, at least) can recognize the best political candidate, or best policy idea, when they see it. But a growing body of research has revealed an unfortunate aspect of the human psyche that would seem to disprove this notion, and imply instead that democratic elections produce mediocre leadership and policies.

      The research, led by David Dunning, a psychologist at Cornell University, shows that incompetent people are inherently unable to judge the competence of other people, or the quality of those people’s ideas. For example, if people lack expertise on tax reform, it is very difficult for them to identify the candidates who are actual experts. They simply lack the mental tools needed to make meaningful judgments.

      As a result, no amount of information or facts about political candidates can override the inherent inability of many voters to accurately evaluate them. On top of that, “very smart ideas are going to be hard for people to adopt, because most people don’t have the sophistication to recognize how good an idea is,” Dunning told Life’s Little Mysteries.

      He and colleague Justin Kruger, formerly of Cornell and now of New York University, have demonstrated again and again that people are self-delusional when it comes to their own intellectual skills. Whether the researchers are testing people’s ability to rate the funniness of jokes, the correctness of grammar, or even their own performance in a game of chess, the duo has found that people always assess their own performance as “above average” — even people who, when tested, actually perform at the very bottom of the pile. [Incompetent People Too Ignorant to Know It]

      Recently, and not surprisingly, 54% of the Amurkin polity could not name the 3 branches of government. The thought that sub-literates, morons, sociopaths, sub-humans’ votes equal mine and yours, Dear Readers, ensures the End of Days and Götterdammerung of the entire edifice of civilization and order, progress, etc, etc, etc.

      This is but a part of my prescription for a successful, perpetual society and culture to thrive. Any idea what others may be?

      • Poupon Marx
        Poupon Marx says:

        https://www.declineoftheempire.com/2012/03/democracies-always-fail.html

        Many circumvent, obscure and bypass the real causes of effects and actions. This is due to avoidance of hard facts, ugly and obvious stimuli, and the gap between knowing and corrective action.

        “The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.”
        ― Frédéric Bastiat

        “Over the centuries, mankind has tried many ways of combating the forces of evil … prayer, fasting, good works and so on. Up until Doom, no one seemed to have thought about the double-barrel shotgun. Eat leaden death, demon.” – Terry Pratchett

        “The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended.”
        ― Frédéric Bastiat

      • Emicho
        Emicho says:

        Since when did we stop going by what produces the best results for the common people (an aristocracy, tied to the land, with some democratic suffrage for a certain responsible few, with a solid stake in the nation, to keep the rulers at least not embarrassingly corrupt), and swap it for a utopian system of mass suffrage democracy for every punter and his dog, which is totally manipulated (((by who ever owns the mass media/culture)))?
        How many more decades must we suffer under this scam, year after year after year, where EVERYTHING gets worse, NOTHING gets better, yet we cling to it like a man overboard clinging to a fat corpse because he believes him to be worthy?
        There is enough wealth in every advanced industrial nation to support a corrupt elite. A non-corrupt elite is an oxy-moron. Only a hostile Jewish elite actively works without sleep to destroy nations and everything and everyone in it.
        Aren’t the results of mass democracy in? Haven’t they been in for decades? Could they possibly be worse? I mean it, in what way could they possibly be?
        I wrack my brain to think of how things could be more catastrophic than they are now.
        Perhaps we could have had all of our industrial/population centres annihilated by atomic weapons at the height of the Cold War.
        But that would leave millions of survivors, and survivors of the pre-1960’s kind, I.e. the kind that could instantly rebuild.
        Jews leave the outer shell standing, but hollow out, degrade and rot the soul of the people. The mass immigration is cruel to our people now, due to their predation on us, but they are no future threat.
        As soon as America collapses we’ll be free to run our own affairs and ship these invaders back to where they came from. I’d pay them good money to see them go, its not their fault.
        As for whose fault it is, I very much doubt we’d get our hands on them, they’d bolt like rats at the very first sniff of approaching danger. They’ve had hundreds of years of practice in this.
        But there’s nothing to stop us allying with the rest of the West and launching a worldwide hunt to track them down. Didn’t something similar to this happen after WWII?
        So there can be no wailing of unfairness. They used every sly, dirty, criminal gangsters’ trick in the book to kidnap their ‘enemies’.
        We’d even put ours on show trials too, but in truth, they wouldn’t need be show trials, we could follow every principle of English justice, offer them all the protection of the common law, and the only thing we’d need worry about would be the English common folk storming the court and lynching the scum, once they became aware of the crimes committed against them and their children
        for the first time.

    • JM
      JM says:

      @Edward Harris
      Well, based on your – well documented – Report, I’d say that between the French and the Poms…we’re well and truly rooted.

  4. Chris
    Chris says:

    As an aside… look at the differences in the noses between LePen and Zemmour. How are these two members of the same nation?

    • Al Ross
      Al Ross says:

      Curvature of rear in the former is appealing . A hindbrain woman ?

      Curvature of nostril in the latter, a gene expressional indication of trouble ahead.

      • Emicho
        Emicho says:

        Ha ha! And there’s not a red-blooded man on earth who’s kick niece Le Pen out of bed neither!
        I salute your rare skill Mr Ross, of degenerating a scholarly magazine for the thinking white man, into something you’d more likely find in the pages of The Viz.
        And all in one comment of two sentences!
        That people, is what we call skill.
        With such talent out there, perhaps there is a future for us after all.

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        “… trouble ahead”? Damn right, Al. As many a road sign has warned travelers, Caution! Sharp Curve! Dangerous When Wet.

  5. Curmudgeon
    Curmudgeon says:

    While it is true that Macron won the last election, there is a good reason to believe that Le Pen was much closer than the “official result”, despite the fraud allegations surrounding her campaigns for the European Parliament. I am unable to find links now, but at the time there were irregularities where tens of thousands of people were removed from voters lists because their voter ID cards were returned as them having moved when they hadn’t, and issues with ballots themselves, all dealing with Le Pen. It was almost like a practice run for the 2020 US elections.
    One thing that Americans need to understand, is that, generally speaking, in France, a “right wing” party will be “left” of the phony “left” in the Democrat Party.

    • Emicho
      Emicho says:

      What we need to understand is that the entirety of the Western World’s voting system is about as straight as a 6 pound note. It’s the exact same ‘people’ at the top of all our corrupt systems.

      “The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
      – Frank Zappa.

      I reckon we have now entered this period, people.

      • Rae West
        Rae West says:

        With respect, I think elections in earlier times were more honest. I have a booklet on voting and election procedures in Britain from about 1900 which gives intricate details on correct procedures by the officials. I think you’ll find Jews wanted to get into power, and worked with the system. Most people could not imagine it would be corrupted. Under this system, even very extreme measures could be passed (consider income tax, estate ‘duty’, wartime emergency measures etc). If and when Jews gained control, the strict rule-following was progressively loosened. It’s just another example of corruption introduced by Jews.

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          I agree. Even in the late sixties, when I was still voting here in New York, verification of eligibility was very rigorous, and no one who lacked proof of having registered was permitted to vote. When the rules began to be relaxed, during the interminable incumbency of Governor Nelson Rockefeller, it was plain to everyone white that the object in view was to enable more blacks to vote than had formerly been eligible. Since the media, with the exception of one or two newspapers not then owned by Jews, uniformly regarded voting “reform” as a very good thing, there was virtually no backlash against the politicians who supported it.

          In short, though the handwriting was on the wall, no more saw it then than see it now. Nonetheless, the former have better excuses for their culpable naïveté than the latter.

          • Emicho
            Emicho says:

            Yeah, that is what I meant by the Zappa quote.
            The elections didn’t need to be dishonest in the past because we weren’t ruled Jews.
            If a nation is run by its own, you can happily have mass suffrage elections, as they would just produce the exact same elites as the more restricted voting systems going back to James I produced.
            Obviously with beneficial innovations, sometimes, like parties for working men, and catastrophic disasters, like votes for women.
            (In a way, that was when the Jews had us. They cannot control the masses of men’s minds, because we are too individualistic. But (almost all)woman just vote for the way the wind is blowing. Hence, when trying to get through woman’s suffrage(with terrorism we should remember), it was the liberals & progressives who blocked it most, because they understood the nature of woman is to vote for the zeitgeist(& who controls that these days?)
            But the early 1900’s zeitgeist was not what liberals, fabians, or Labour wanted.
            What i meant was that we are now entering the period where to keep up the long since corrupted political system of every Western nation, is probably becoming more trouble than it’s worth.
            I cannot see how the Democrats can possibly hide, again, their intended mass cheating come the midterms. Which makes me think 2020 might have been Americans last national election.
            And we will all fall in like dominoes just like we do in everything bloody else.

    • Armoric
      Armoric says:

      “there were irregularities where tens of thousands of people were removed from voters lists”

      But it doesn’t make a big difference since Macron got 20 millions votes in 2017, while Marine Le Pen got only 10 million. It’s harder to cheat in France than in the USA. There is better control of voter ID, with no voting by mail and no mysterious voting machines. On election day, you put your ballot in a blank envelop which you drop in a transparent box which stays on top of the same table until the evening. Then the box is opened and they count the votes in every polling station. It doesn’t take long. In the USA, from what I’ve read, the ballots are not counted at each polling station but sent without supervision to a “central vote-counting facility” where suitcases of Biden ballots are waiting under the tables.

      The election system is rigged in France as in every other Western country, but it’s done through censorship, defamation, psychological intimidation, as well as heavy media support for the Jewish-approved candidates. In 2017, they also destroyed the candidacy of the “conservative” François Fillon by speeding up the judicial proceedings against him on account of his wife’s fake job, while casting a veil over Macron’s shady dealings as a Rothschild employee and as a Minister of the economy.

      Besides, the opinion poll firms are Jewish. They keep doing fake polls to establish who are the most popular celebrities in France, and it’s always Jews. I guess they have rendered a similar service to Zemmour, as a way to jump start his election campaign.

  6. Leon Haller
    Leon Haller says:

    The problem, though, the real moral and racial rot, is much deeper. If the French REALLY wanted to stop the Third World invasion, they could have voted FN a long time ago, couldn’t they? Of course, masses of Republicans whites here could have voted for Pat Buchanan in the 90s, running in part on an anti-immigration platform, but they didn’t. And of course, British could have voted BNP, Germans AFD, etc.

    All these sadly missed opportunities simply bolster my long term thesis (which I have stated here many times): whites as a whole are evolutionarily defective, and will go extinct unless those of us who are sane gather into a handful of sovereign nations where we can be the electoral majorities – and then proceed to create “teleological racial states” specifically dedicated to white preservation (and, I believe necessary, eugenic improvement). Otherwise, whites will continue to be what we have been for the whole postwar era, only in ever worse shape due to continuing (as well as past) mass immigration (along with ever-rising miscegenation and intensifying cultural marxist indoctrination): powerless minorities destined for genetic extinction.

    WE MUST BECOME ELECTORAL MAJORITIES SOMEWHERE! We can only do that via white nationalist global relocation and some “peaceful” demographic conquest of our own.

    • Poupon Marx
      Poupon Marx says:

      Leon H., you are absolutely correct on your diagnosis, prescription, and proscription. Our situation is digital, either failure, i.e., annihilation or salvation. I hope dearly that this comes to be accepted by the sufficient number of “Whites”-Indo-Europeans as an imperative. Do or die.

      The Demonrats, NWO, and the Satanists will provide the catalyst and impetus that will galvanize I. E.s to action, which has to be continuous. They cannot stop, anymore than a rabid dog, or drugged psychotic compulsive killer.

      • Leon Haller
        Leon Haller says:

        Thank you for your reply. Our problem is that we are being passively genocided. I don’t wish for a civil war, esp at my age (61) and geographic location, but active genocide might actually wake up the white “normals” (I think white liberals, including the “low tax race liberals” calling themselves “Reagan {or Tory} conservatives”, are so mentally defective that they will rationalize and excuse their own extermination).

        The Deep State/Occupationist Regime has always had to be careful in its “managerial” genocide (so, eg., Biden’s messy open border treason {from our perspective}, but idiocy from the genocidalists’, is likely to lead to at least some degree of salutary electoral backlash; the young genocidalist radicals have overestimated their power – the level of genocide that will be tolerated without provoking the proles into resistance – for the moment, and their party will pay for it at the ballot box). But generally, the Occupiers have been extraordinarily successful in dispossessing whites of their homelands via demographic dilution; much of their wealth and property rights via interracially redistributionary taxation as well as the institutionalization of a racio-ideological/political spoils system determining too much professional advancement; and, increasingly, of their old fashioned liberties via ever worsening legislative assaults (Americans are lucky that we have 1st and 2nd Amendments – though when the Anglo-Occidental ethnopsychology and historic culture underlaying them have been sufficiently defenestrated via the aforesaid dilution and mass indoctrination, the liberties these amendments uphold are mere historical and juridical residua, and on borrowed time).

        They have weaponized whites’ innate moral superiority against us by defining “racism” as some kind of ultimate evil (at most, it can be argued to be an evil, but a small one), and in a way which obviously is incoherent, but which leads invariably to white extinction (which is the whole point). I believe this has been, and to a considerable extent still is, the key to their power (though white survival hard power – in the old Soviet sense of the “correlation of forces” – is rapidly objectively dwindling, too), which is why I so often emphasize the need for a deep reconstruction of Christian systematic moral theology (because I know that the “morality” of antiracism as currently understood is, in theological fact, false).

        Nevertheless, even as we must seek to philosophize our way to a correct position which allows for white preservation, we must also deal with that “correlation of forces”. Just because we possess the moral high ground does not guarantee our racial survival! I possess the moral high ground against a homicidal lunatic, too, but I’d better also have the superior weaponry and skill to deploy it!

        So in assessing our situation, we must be ruthlessly dispassionate and objective. It’s all well and good to rail against our persecutors, but doing so won’t save us. I ask, what will? I long ago came to the conclusion that I stated above. I’m open to considering any and all other avenues leading to white perpetuity, but I don’t see any. The personal incentives against radical action are just too overwhelming. The System is strong because, for the moment (only), whites can still enjoy relatively good personal lives – as long as they don’t rock the boat by focusing on the endgame of existent trends. Most whites, moreover, remain unawakened, and too many of those who are see the futility of it all, and just vote GOP (Tory, etc) and otherwise throw up their hands and try to provide for loved ones and live enjoyable lives as best they can. It’s a constant race against time. As more of our people awaken, our absolute numbers and thus electoral control of our societies are continuously decreasing. In another 50 years, a majority of those whites who remain alive (after so many racially uncommitted whites shall have miscegenated their genomes out of our race) might be as awakened as TOO readers – but no longer in any physical-force position to do a damn thing with their knowledge!

        Nothing is but thinking makes it so. If whites wish to survive as a race, they, or enough of them, will have to affirmatively decide to do so. Racial perpetuity will have to become a moral priority, as will gathering unto ourselves the modalities of physical force. I have ideas on all this, but the first step (beyond initial racial awakening) is to understand that our race is somehow genetically predisposed to this modern utopian, race-reality-denialism and its attendant policy follies; that is, that not even close to all of our people (ie, their genomes) can in fact be saved. We must focus our investigations into how the healthy ones can be.

    • Emicho
      Emicho says:

      Considering even the aristocracy at the beginning of the 20th century could only really expect about half their progeny to survive, don’t you think these photo line-ups of antifa are simply the defective creatures nature intended to dispose of, but were saved by modern medicine?
      If this thesis is true, then there is nothing wrong with our race, lest all the chemicals and vaccines we’ve been poisoned with from birth. But nature is tough, living a generation of two will flush this shite out our systems in my opinion.
      Considering this dilemma, we wouldn’t need to abandon modern birthing technology and go back to letting God decide which infant survives, nor take a good look at them at 5 or 18 or 21 and go the Spartan way.
      We cannot afford that, anyway.
      These leftist/antifa types, are to all intents and purposes women. They only worship the culture/system because that is what woman do.
      This works fantastically when you have a Victorian female aristocracy and they imbibe every single aspect of that, when we reached, not just us but all whites, Americans, Russians, Germans, Spanish and of course English, the pinnacle of our civilisation. Have you seen these women? I doubt even God could improve on their perfection.
      Once we extract the (((agents of Satan))) from our mist and create a culture of our own, women and faggoty, woman-brained men would imbibe and be the most fanatic defenders of our system, just like they are the most fanatic defenders of our current system.
      No, our problem would be individualistic men arguing over conservatism, libertarianism, schisms, theology, starting new communities, waging war or not, everything down to the correct colour of shit.
      Look at the way all us red-pilled men argue on this site for a glimpse of this future.
      Only two things could stop this self destruction. One, an extremely carefully picked authoritarian hereditary king, with life or death power, and a powerful set of based advisers with special powers to keep the king in line. Plus a culture that did nothing but present the history of our near extinction.
      And absolutely no Jews of any sort, tested through .DNA

        • Emicho
          Emicho says:

          “But generally, the Occupiers have been extraordinarily successful in dispossessing whites of their homelands via demographic dilution; much of their wealth and property rights via interracially redistributionary taxation as well as the institutionalization of a racio-ideological/political spoils system determining too much professional advancement; and, increasingly, of their old fashioned liberties via ever worsening legislative assaults (Americans are lucky that we have 1st and 2nd Amendments – though when the Anglo-Occidental ethnopsychology and historic culture underlaying them have been sufficiently defenestrated via the aforesaid dilution and mass indoctrination, the liberties these amendments uphold are mere historical and juridical residua, and on borrowed time).”

          Now that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you write a paragraph.

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      We can only [become electoral majorities] via white nationalist global relocation and some “peaceful” demographic conquest of our own.

      Unfortunately, Leon, Liechtenstein is under full-bore Jewish assault for its numerous crimes against woke humanity. Thus, it is unlikely to survive in its 1,200-year-old form very much longer. As for Andorra and San Marino, their immigration laws can probably be got around, but when 90 percent of a country’s unoccupied territory is owned by (((international bankers))) and, moreover, the country can be traversed in roughly forty minutes in a ’37 Ford, more than good will and good luck will be needed to set it up as a base for the White Reconquista.

      Jocularity aside, the sorry fact is that, barring something akin to a miraculous deliverance, a genuinely horrible fifty years (at minimum) is staring the white nations of the Old World and the New in the face. Being now in the latter half of my seventies, I know that I won’t live long enough to suffer anything like the worst that the Jews have planned for us. I wish to heaven that there were something I could do to help those who will.

      • Emicho
        Emicho says:

        You really believe the dark heart of this Beast system, the behind the scenes banker Zionist Jews who control America, Israel and Nato, have 50 years left?
        I’d bet 50 hours and reckon I’d be closer.
        These monsters inherited this system, they didn’t build it, they can’t build anything, which with hindsight, it wasn’t totally wise for our forefathers to put this thing together for them.
        No system based 100% on lies can long last, those running it don’t even know where the lies begin and end.
        And thank God for China. They are easily stupid enough to attack them and would collapse like a house of cards if they did. Who’s going to fight for them? Re-train their FBI Antifa assets? I’d pay money to watch them be slaughtered by Russians or Chinese, who wouldn’t?
        You’re in your 70s you say. Can’t you feel the collapse of this demonic crime syndicate speeding up?
        You remember 30 years ago. Did you have a Siagon moment in a Third World backwater, an out of control invasion of a totally collapsed souther border, a general uprising of parents screaming in rage at the garbage taught their children, instantaneous chants in sports stadiums against the President, last summer when every city in America burnt to the ground, a President so senile and pathetic he cannot even speak, the biggest ever grass roots uprising in the Western World against a stupid plan to inject people with God knows what against their will, an economy rapidly spinning out of control, the completion of the American publics’ utter contempt for every single one of its institutions, with the total loss of respect for the military, all of this and more in just one month?
        What will next month bring?
        These people are failing at an astonishing speed. We millenials can see it. We just hope and pray we live to see the monster come crashing down. We’re already mentally and physically preparing for what comes next.
        Have no fear for us, we cannot wait. And they can take down as many white fags, whores, beta males, trannies and useless middle age buerocrats as they want, the more, the better. We won’t be needing them.
        We’ll survive, and the less dross around when the time comes the better for all concerned.

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          No system based 100% on lies can long last, those running it don’t even know where the lies begin and end.

          At its founding, the Soviet Union was measurably closer to the 100 percent falsity mark than the USA is today. Yet it endured seventy years and would have endured another twenty were it not that Gorbachev and his associates lacked the indifference to committing mass murder that characterized all his predecessors at the top.

          Then there’s the Roman Empire. By the time that the revulsion toward Nero had become so great that those who made him emperor compelled him to kill himself (68 AD), the disorder, indeed chaos, within the ruling class and the absence of popular support throughout the entire state was such that, as Tacitus wrote some twenty years later, predictions of the empire’s disintegration were everywhere. Tacitus himself, who died in 102, thought collapse was imminent simply because all forces within and without the empire were tearing it apart. Yet though the Roman imperium had even less popular support then than the American imperium does now, the Roman Empire endured another 375 years.

          In both of these cases and in a great many others, the presence of clubs, swords, rifles, bombs, and now nuclear weapons in the hands of powerful people, people who have few if any scruples about using them against (in their eyes) the worthless millions whom they rule, is a factor that an observer discounts or ignores at his peril—especially the peril to those critical faculties of “millennials” that assure them that today’s tyranny is unlikely to endure another fifty hours.

          • Leon Haller
            Leon Haller says:

            Terrible truths, well stated. There is no historical inevitability wrt intellectual change; only wrt the most sweeping outcomes of statistically very large aggregates (eg, we can state with confidence that importing masses of Africans into a non-African nation will invariably lead to increases in crime; that outlawing the use of fossil fuels in favor or ‘renewables’ at the present level of technology will lead to higher energy costs; that forcing low-IQ students into the classrooms of the high IQ will harm the instruction of the high IQs more than it will improve that of the low IQs; etc).

          • Rae West
            Rae West says:

            You’re neglecting the world situation. The USSR didn’t survive on its own. It was supported by the USA – or, much more accurately, by Jews in the USA. I doubt if it ever fell, in fact. No doubt something similar was true of Rome. And ‘nuclear weapons’ are a myth, though of course money-making. You need to cram a dose of revisionism into your remaining years!

          • Emicho
            Emicho says:

            Wow, a personal reply from the distinguished, nay, illustrious, the famous Mr de Craon! My, this is a special day for me. Sir, I do doff my hat to you. Those of us of these here parts know of you, and your reputation, and know well fine sir, that tales of your wisdom reach the most remote and forgotten shires of this here land.

            You’re going to have to forgive me, this reply will not be brief, as I intend to do you the honour of addressing most of your points.

            “At its founding, the Soviet Union was measurably closer to the 100 percent falsity mark than the USA is today.”

            This i cannot have. The stupidity of Marxism took years to work its way into all the major sciences of the SU. And though it may have been allowed to run riot in matters of no importance to the elite, like feeding the people, it was NOT allowed to get in the way of what really mattered to them, I’m thinking their space programme, nuclear weapons, industrial development, military development or interfere in any way in their world class espionage operations.
            I ask you straight up, could today’s ruling American clique, with 100 years of an advance in technology, have won a civil war, pacified a gigantic empire, and took their nation from an agrarian to industrial economy in one generation?
            Nancy, Obama, and those weird Jews there’re surrounded with, could match Lenin, Trotsky and Beria? Come now.
            Plus, for goodness sake, the talent, the wisdom, the sheer human capital of late Czarist Russia was light years ahead of the clown show in DC, at least they were in touch with hard, cruel reality. How far would AOC have got in those brutal post war days? Pimp-slapped and chained up in a brothel the minute she opened her delusional pie hole. That’s how far.(best place for her if you ask me, at least she can’t do any damage)

            “Yet it endured seventy years and would have endured another twenty were it not that Gorbachev and his associates lacked the indifference to committing mass murder that characterized all his predecessors at the top.”

            I’m very surprised you put more weight on the actions of Gorbachev, than on the 50 years of crushing pressure the USA put on the USSR for its collapse. And this was the Cold War USA, which was a very different beast from today’s farcical imitation.

            I could argue about Rome with you, just for the sheer fun of it, but I do know when I’m out my depth. My knowledge of Rome is shameful. So as I’m dealing with TOO’s most famous gentleman commentor, I’ll ape his style and bow out of this part gracefully.

            “especially the peril to those critical faculties of “millennials” that assure them that today’s tyranny is unlikely to endure another fifty hours.”

            Now that is what I like to see, old codgers striking back against the never ending cheek we throw up at you boomers. We certainly deserve some retaliation, it actually inspires me that a man in his late 70’s still has such spirit.
            Be in no doubt sir, we despise boomers as a generation who were given everything and let everything go to Hell on their watch.
            Of course this isn’t anything against you, any more than some Englishman who hates Scots would be of offence to me.
            But know this. As much as we blame you for ALOT, we do at least accept that you were and are better people than we could ever be. And I mean this in every way imaginable. How could you not be? You weren’t raised in the Jewish sh#thole degeneracy we were, were you? Just it’s pale genesis. Of course one of you guys are worth 10 of us.
            We’ve also zero illusions about our own failings, it’s especially spiritually painful when compared to the generations that fought the Kaiser, Hitler, Napoleon, the General strike, invented the Labour Party, you know what I mean, I don’t need to go on.

            Anyways, I appreciate the reply, you’ve made my day.

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            Would it do you any harm to grow up, Emicho? Leave the schoolyard and its petty snarls and resentments to those even younger and less mature than you.

            Since in this thread you’ve been regaling those whose ankles you’ve been biting with quotes from those you evidently consider towering intellects (Zappa et al.), let me offer you one of my own—turnabout being fair play, after all.

            Sir, clear your mind of cant.
            —Samuel Johnson

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            By the way, Emicho, I’m not a boomer. Can’t you count? In your innumeracy are you a typical “millennial,” or is innumeracy simply another mark of what makes you special?

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            The USSR didn’t survive on its own. It was supported by the USA …

            There’s truly nothing new under the sun, is there, Rae/Rerevisionist?

            But to the point. You are aware, aren’t you, that the sentence and a half quoted above plainly contradicts one of the doctrines of Lord Emicho? Brace yourself for a retaliatory assault. I hope that for your sake he doesn’t use his ultimate WMD: calling you a boomer.

          • Pierre de Craon
            Pierre de Craon says:

            There is no historical inevitability wrt intellectual change; only wrt the most sweeping outcomes of statistically very large aggregates.

            Thank you for your reply, Leon, especially for the sentence cited above. I would add only that though this distinction is important, it is a distinction that holds little appeal for people who would rather work from off-the-rack, mass-produced mental schemata than draw conclusions on the basis of close observation of events over the long term and of men’s varying responses, in both their similarities and differences, to those events.
            ———
            May I add a word or two about your reply to P. Marx? Since you know pretty well what the areas of likely agreement and disagreement between us are, I’ll remark instead upon what I see as the most provocative thing you say: “Nothing is but thinking makes it so.”

            I call this half-quote from Hamlet provocative because I think that the allusion is more than coincidental. He speaks the sentence* as one of a series of chivying comments to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, a pair of sad rogues whose ordinariness is almost as appealing as their lack of integrity and honor is unappealing. I think that, like Hamlet, you look to provoke those to whom you are speaking by saying something that is perhaps less universally true than it appears in the hope—well founded? ill founded?—that you can prompt a reaction that is more than a hackneyed response. If even once you can get an interlocutor to draw back before he answers one generality with another, you will have gotten him to use his wits for the purpose that God put them into his noggin. So, nicely done; all the more so if it works!
            ______________
            *In the play it reads thus: “… there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”

      • Leon Haller
        Leon Haller says:

        Thank you for your reply. I have replied at some length to Poupon Marx above which might interest you.

  7. Angelicus
    Angelicus says:

    I couldn’t give a damn about the coming elections in France (and everywhere). They are ALL rigged. When is this going to get through the awfully thick skulls of some TOO readers I do not know (nor that I really care).

    Marine Le Pen is the French version of that clown called Donal D. Trump who did ZERO for White America. From time to time the average voter/moron is given/shown a candidate that looks as if he/she will really change things. This candidate will say the right things (as Trump did) and the flag-waving fools (a.k.a patriots) will vote for him/her convinced that he/she is the long-awaited Saviour.
    Wrong!!!

    We will NEVER get out of this hell by putting some stupid piece of paper in a box. Wake up!!!

    • Emicho
      Emicho says:

      “We will NEVER get out of this hell by putting some stupid piece of paper in a box. Wake up!!!”

      True enough. But we must continue to let the masses be more and more worn down by this democracy scam. Every election that passes when absolutely nothing gets better, and everything gets worse, is slowly grinding away the faith of the normies in this stupidity.
      We cannot tell them it’s a scam against their own interests, they must see it for themselves.
      In general, excepting an exciting election with a Trump or a Brexit on the table, the share of people who just don’t vote at all increases. This is what we want. These are our people, the ‘none of the aboves’.
      It’s heading remorselessly towards a critical mass, the only factor is time. And the worse things get during this time, as worse they bloody will get, just plays to our advantage.

      • Angelicus
        Angelicus says:

        Excellent observation my friend! Yes, this disgusting, rotten system has to implode victim of his own contradictions. I think it will take the lives of thousands of Whites but so be it. As I said before, most Whites are traitors/cowards, we don’t need them. The Aryan spirit that produced the German miracle of 1933 is now dead as their standard-bearers were almost exterminated (the German generation of 1918 -1945).

        Perhaps I will not live to see its rebirth (I am 62) but I don’t care we must carry on doing everything within our power to awaken those who are unaware of our problem.

        Have a good day!

Comments are closed.