What Marine Le Pen Is Really About

What we ought to want is a Europe filled with variations of Israel


Charles Krauthammer is a very bright guy who is nearly always right on the issues, but his argument that a Le Pen victory in the French presidential election would be a disaster for Europe is utterly wrong-headed. France, he said on Fox News last week, is the lynchpin of modern Europe and is necessary to prevent a return to the sort of nationalism that plagued the continent during the last century.

The nationalism he is referring to was the hyper-aggressive attitude of Germany, Italy, and Russia – whose misconduct is well known – and also of Poland, whose arbitrary annexation of Vilnius and grab of Teschen during the partition of Czechoslovakia needlessly disrupted Eastern Europe. The problem then, as now, is not “nationalism,” which is neither good nor bad in itself, but rather aggressive nationalism that threatens neighbors.

The resistance the peoples of occupied Europe used to defy and distract the Nazis in lands like Poland, Norway, Holland, and France was also nationalism – good nationalism, which asserted the traditional values of those peoples in opposition to the new European order the Nazis were proclaiming.

The problem in dealing with the totalitarian threats in the last century was not excessive nationalism, but insufficient nationalism. When peoples asserted their rights as a separate nation, though occupied and threatened, these peoples brought down evil empires.

The Poles defied first the Nazis and then the Soviets, and the success of Solidarity as well as Pope John Paul II as the “Polish pope” broke the back of the Warsaw Pact. The agitation of the Baltic States, actually incorporated into the Soviet Union, weakened that whole empire.

When a people views itself as having a unique nation that is its own and a culture connected directly to that nation, then the people will defend itself. A perfect example of this in practice is Israel, which, without a strong national identity and a value system based upon the history of the Jewish people, would doubtless be swallowed into the horrific mess that is most of West Asia.

What we ought to want is a Europe filled with variations of Israel, seeking peace and eschewing aggression but demanding the safety of the people from internal as well as external threats. If France began to behave like Israel, dealing in a no-nonsense manner with anyone who threatened its people or its right to exist with a unique culture, then Europe would be stronger, not weaker. Every nation that, in its own way, followed suit would strengthen, not weaken, Europe.

What about the economic argument? If France withdrew from the European Union, would the sky fall in? Six European nations, including France, formed the Common Market, which was in many ways the beginning of the European Union. Nothing would prevent France from entering into a series of mutually advantageous trade agreements, and surely she would.

That does not mean creating an empire of bureaucrats and politicians whose alliance is to a super-national quasi-state. The problems today of ending the European Union are similar to the problems of super-banks in 2009 – it is “too big to fail” – which is to say the mess this union has created can be ended only with some disruption and discomfort, but that does not mean that the result over time will not be much better.

The sovereign debt problems in much of Europe have been aggravated by the European Union. The two leading creditors of sovereign debt in Greece, one of the worst offenders, are the European Central Bank, a creature of the European Union, and the European Union itself. If the European Union had not been propping up the bad behavior of successive Greek governments, Greece would have been forced to face and fix its debt problem, which is to say to do what it ought to do.

Supra-national organizations nearly always fail, with NATO during the Cold War being, perhaps, the only exception. The United Nations is a monstrosity, the League of Nations was a farce, and the European Union is an idea whose time is past. Nations are real things connected to culture and history and values and interests. The peaceful assertion of that culture and history and those values and interests is not a threat to peace, but the best promise of peace.

April 26, 2017 | Comments Off on What Marine Le Pen Is Really About | 73 views

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

8 Comments / 0 Comments

  1. what a farce has been written here ! A mishmash of gross generalizations over 200 years of Modern history .So let’s undo this blah-blah .
    A Le Pen victory would be a disaster for France . Ms Le Pen is a mixture of Statism intervention and Petainist defeatism . France is a country where 56% of the GDP is absorbed by the State for the inefficient purpose of socialist redistribution . Ms Le Pen proposes more State , more regulations from above , and in the end more taxes . Now her Petainist defeatism is also a nuisance . Speaking from a cultural offensive point of view, she thinks she can stop the anglo-saxon mainstream culture at the door of Charles de Gaulle airport . Unfortunately this is ” la grande illusion ” . And last but not least , her party is full of antisemites , bigots , low rank people who have only their hate and ignorance of the rest of the world to argue about , not to cite a few die-hard nazis who masturbate when they read railroad stations pulp fictions about the WW II and the death camps .
    2nd point : According to the author , europe has a deficit of nationalism and therefore is unable to defeat totalitarism . Let’s be frank , the true ” PATRIOTS ” were always a fringe minority . Without the Soviet Stalinist Red Army mincing the germans at Stalingrad, there would have been no US-GB landing in Normandy . Red Totalitarism won over Black totalitarism .Nationalism in Europe started in 1789 and developped into the 1848 rebellions against the monarchies ,The climax of nationalism was 1914-1918 , which produced the useless european massacre , a whimsical blood thirst by the prussian aristocracy .
    So far for Historical grand thinking .
    Now the author turns his attention to what kind of ” ethos ” France should adopt ; and farcically again, he advises France to be a bit more like Israel . Should I laugh ? France is a richly endowed country , a ” fatcat ” among europe , and in no ways his ruling elites will change the social-national mood towards some more assertive- cut the bullshit – gloves off israeli style . France ruling elites excels in hypocrisy , double and triple games, duplicity and all those ” qualiteies ” wrapped in ” exception culturelle ” ‘ grandeur ” ” mission universelle ” etc…just to cite a few rethoric sentences the ruling elites mouth is full . Now the real question about France is WHO FOOT THEIR BILL ? answer : the active people , the entrepreneurs , the middle class . WHO RECEIVE THE PAYBACK ? the undereducated , the muslim invaders who receive free french citizenship ( 12 millions of french muslims with dual citizenship ! ) the civil servants and their bloated ” fonction publique ” who neither function nor is public but who is very eager to defend their ” statut ” ( pension at 60 years and even 55 ) , 35 hours work week payed like 40 hours , long holidays , excellent and free public health . Just imagine that 25% of the working population is maintained by taxes when it’s 11% in Germany.
    Last gross generalisation : The debt of Greece was created by the european politicians ? Really it was created by the greek ruling class who is made of superb tricksters and were helped in this matter by a small US advisor named Goldman Sachs….funny n’ est ce pas ?
    So to be honest France is lost , maybe a third of the country can manage the globalization , but therest will be crushed or left with bread crumbles . and for the french jews it’s time to pack up and go . But here Israel burocracy is not very clever and not very helpful .Another 50,000 jews will leave in the next ten years for the US ,Canada , GB and elsewhere.

  2. Hi Ted, little historical context for the remarks about Polish lang-grabs.

    The Polish grab of Vilnius was not that arbitrary. The city was only 2% Lithuanian and 98% Polish + Jewish…
    How would this qualify as “aggressive” nationalism?

    The Cieszyn Slesvia, was also Polish majority and its inclusion into Czechy or Czechoslovakia was really a mistake. However Poland chose a horrible moment for taking Cieszyn Slesia, they did that at the same time as Germany occupied Czechoslovakia. That was horrible, and the Czech president told the Poles, you’ll next, and he was right.

  3. You are right about the free trade zone.
    EU started as EEC. I am not sure about other countries, but I was in Denmark when Danes voted for economic free trade zone, they never had a plebiscite for political union.
    The European countries can still have free trade zone without political union.

    As for Euro, I think it would make more sense for it to be for North European countries only. Germany, Holland, Belgium, Denmark and Sweden could also fit into such monetary union because all of these countries are on a similar economical level.
    France and England would probably be much more open to Euro if it did not include Greece, Portugal and Spain. Italy is really two countries. The North is developed, the South is more like Greece.

  4. Walker lost me, explaining how Charles Karuthammer’s opinion of Le Pen meant Europe should become like Israel. I like Krauthammer, and follow his videos; but I don’t take what he says as Biblical truth.

    Concerning French politics, ALL the major parties, including Le Pen’s, are socialist, and economically to the left of the American Democratic Party. Le Pen wants France to leave the EU, as the majority of Brits voted to do the same; and she wants France out of the central command of NATO, the same as did Charles de Gaulle and many French Presidents after him. I fail to see anything truly “radical” about the woman or her party.

  5. Macron won by 65%. Wasn’t it close? Le Pen got 34%*. Did everybody lie to the pollsters? What for? Could there have been Electoral fraud perhaps?


    *Excuse-moi. The article says he got approximately 65 percent of the vote but she got exactly, 34.5 percent. How come they know exactly to the decimal point by how much she lost but dey are a leetle fuzzy on how much he won by? I presume Jewish Press is just quoting the official statements. Hmmm?

  6. Then, again, I just discovered an article from May 5 that gives him those poll numbers. So, unless the MSM is as crooked as they are here.

    Macron stretches lead in last throes of French presidential campaign
    by Reuters
    Friday, 5 May 2017 17:30 GMT


    So, would she have banned kipot and shechita (I didn’t read that), she did make statements about public display of religious garb (may grandparents here just wore a regular hat over their kipot) and bannning dual citizenship with countries outside the EU which meant Israel.

    On the other hand, Macron is hostile to Israel and soft on the internal Islamic threat which she was not.

    Either way, Jews will be making aliya from france. Many more, I suspect.

    From last July:

    “Immigration from France to Israel has increased from 1,900 in 2012 to 7,800 in 2015, according to Jewish Agency figures. Since 2000, 10% of the French Jewish community has immigrated to Israel, half of those arriving in the past five years. 2014 marked the first year 1 percent of a Western Jewish community immigrated in a single year.

    According to Army Radio, around 9,000 new immigrants are expected to arrive from all over the world this summer.”


Comments are closed.