The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewGuillaume Durocher Archive
Macron Calls for “European Renaissance” in Controversial Alt-Right Pivot
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

If there is one thing I like about French President Emmanuel Macron, it is his voluntarism. While his presidency necessarily embodies the incoherence and indecision of both the French people and oligarchy – hence the current suboptimal political equilibrium, recognized by all to be highly unsatisfying – Macron as a young globalist evidently has a rare passion and will in promoting his grand designs.

Macron recently wrote an op-ed, translated in the various Europeans and published in newspapers across the continent, making his case for a reformed European Union. The text is interesting for the practical proposals, the implausible promises, and the persuasive arguments against a certain petty-nationalism.

Macron is undeniably a smart guy. Granted, his discourse is notoriously vague, frequently resorting to the expression “en même temps” (at the same time), describing both sides of an issue without pinning himself down. He however has a good understanding of what works with globalism. The globalism of smart and/or hard-working people gathering in multinationals and institutions objectively works on its own terms, producing wealth and innovation (even if some are economically left behind by obsolescence or culturally alienated by immigration and/or Americanization).

On the other hand, Macron also has some idea of what doesn’t work in globalism and can’t help making the occasional politically-incorrect observation. Most productively, he has repeatedly called on black African women to breed less so as to reduce immigration to Europe. He has also pointed out that journalists, as pack animals, are too stupid to understand his “complex thoughts.” Therefore, he concludes sensibly enough, he is avoiding interviews with them.

There was also the recent case of Christophe Dettinger, “the Gypsy from Massy” (a town near Paris), the gilet-jaune who managed to push back several riot policemen fully equipped with armor, shields, and batons, using only his Fists of Righteousness, a moment immortalized in a viral video. Dettinger is in fact a Yenish, an apparently indigenous European nomadic group unrelated to Gypsies, but with a similar reputation for anti-social behavior and theft. He later released a video statement definding his actions before handing himself over to the police. Macron found Dettinger implausibly well-spoken:

The boxer, [in] the video which he made before turning himself in, he was briefed by a far-left lawyer. It’s obvious! This guy, he doesn’t speak like a Gypsy. He doesn’t speak like a Gypsy boxer.

So there you have it, Emmanuel Macron, ethnologue.

As a matter of fact, all top French politicians – while paying lip-service to a notionally colorblind republic of equal and interchangeable citizens – are very conscious of the often ugly ethnic realities of France today. Former prime minister and then-mayor of Évry Manuel Valls, an ardent Zionist, once complained of the number of Africans and Muslims around while walking through his city: “a fine image of the city of Évry. . . . Could you put me a few Whites, a few Whites [in English], a few Blancos?” François Hollande, a former Socialist president, has also made many statements recognizing the racial fragmentation and feelings in the country, even seeing the prospect of civil war and “partition” in the long run.

French politicians know that they shouldn’t make these statements in public and so usually these are off the record, but leak anyway.

Anyway, Macron is also relatively aware of what works and doesn’t work in the European Union. He acknowledges that the EU is too often indecisive and reduced to a “soulless market.” He opens his letter with candid admissions:

Never since the Second World War has Europe been so essential. Yet never has Europe been in such danger. Brexit stands as the symbol of that. It symbolizes the crisis of a Europe that has failed to respond to its peoples’ need for protection from the major shocks of the modern world.

There is that word: protection. Every community, every nation has a theodicy, an account for the existence of evil in the world. In the case of French politics, what is frequently lamented is the lack of protection for citizens in the face of globalization. Concretely, Macron is making the case for more “reciprocity” and protectionism in European trade policy, rather than the current naïve position of unilateral openness and ‘neutral’ rule-following in the face of more self-interested partners:

We need to reform our competition policy and reshape our trade policy, penalizing or banning businesses that compromise our strategic interests and fundamental values such as environmental standards, data protection, and fair payment of taxes; and the adoption of a European preference in strategic industries and our public procurement, as our American and Chinese competitors do.

Personally I find all these measures quite reasonable: trade is only a means towards the kind of society you want (determined by your values) and should not compromise your sovereignty, that is to say your agency. Then again, I’m French. With the traditionally free-trading United Kingdom on the way out, and a recent protectionist turn among German big business, the EU may well turn against free trade or at least take a much more qualified position.

There is evidence that Macron has been reading Steve Sailer’s arguments in favor of “continentalism.” In order to protect and defend the interests of one’s citizens, you need borders, but Macron argues that these should be continental rather than national, on the grounds of Europe’s shared race values and civilization:

A market is useful, but it should not detract from the need for borders to protect and values that unite. Nationalists are misguided when they claim to defend our identity by withdrawing from the EU, because it is European civilization that unites, frees and protects us.

Other than European protectionism, a long-standing French demand pioneered by such intellectuals as Emmanuel Todd, Macron’s letter is pretty thin on specifics. He touts the EU’s accomplishments and potential in the areas of peace, prosperity (“How would we resist the crises of financial capitalism without the euro, which is a force for the entire EU?” . . . right), financing of local infrastructure (various redistributive “pork” projects), and standing up to tech giants and foreign powers.

Some of these claims are more plausible than others. The EU has, on the whole, certainly increased economic interdependence among European nations and given their shared economy a continental scale. The enlargement of the EU into Central Europe (especially the Visegrád countries) has secured much of that region’s human capital (mostly hard-working and often gifted migrants) and markets for the West-European economy. The EU has real clout in trade negotiations, competition policy (blocking mergers or slapping multi-billion-euro fines even on large American companies), and market regulation (witness all the scroll-bars appearing on your favorite websites following the passage of the EU General Data Protection Regulation [GDPR]).

The EU has also had a surprisingly strong position in the Brexit negotiations, while the British government – under pressure from obstructionists in both the Conservative and Labour parties – has proven an incoherent mess. Without wishing to exaggerate the parallel, the EU’s strong hand, in sticking to agreed defensive positions, somewhat recalls the unity of the newborn United States of America in the war with Great Britain in the eighteenth century, despite these fragile confederacies’ difficulty in agreeing to positive measures binding on all of them.

In other respects, Eurocratic rhetoric is generally not in line with reality. The EU remains almost a geopolitical nullity – notwithstanding some influence, usually misused, in its immediate neighborhood among North African and Eastern European states – rather justifying Léon Degrelle’s passionate assertion that “the small, miserable Europe of this impoverished common market cannot bring men happiness.”

Macron’s own letter lacks realism in many areas. He claims to want a “zero carbon” European economy by 2050, which strikes me as laughable. He also wants to increase the EU budget for innovation so as to regain lost ground in the area of artificial intelligence, a laudable goal, even if it seems Europe will be permanently behind America and China in this area. Macron also says with self-satisfaction: “We have shown that things we were told were unattainable, the creation of a European defence capability and the protection of social rights, were in fact possible.” Again: right . . .

By the way, the YouTube video in which Degrelle’s speech is made is now banned in my country. This kind of censorship does not trouble Emmanuel Macron’s conception of “democracy.” Indeed, he is going along with the general moral panic of metropolitan elites across the West, attributing the rise of populism and political-incorrectness not to their own failures and the Internet’s enabling of free speech (which would require too much self-criticism), but rather on dastardly “fake news” and “cyber-attacks.”

In the same paragraph, Macron defends the “European model” of “democratic freedom,” which is “of people, diversity of opinions, and creation.” The protection of “democracy,” with its “diversity of opinions,” requires according to Macron “European rules banishing incitement to hatred and violence from the internet, since respect for the individual is the bedrock of our civilization and our dignity.” Hence, in the name of the teetering EU’s notional democracy, Macron wants a pan-European censorship regime to crack down on all speech the State deems to be “hate” or “violence.”

This is unsurprising coming from the man who seemingly wants to make ZOG literally true by formally criminalizing anti-Zionist speech in France. (By the way, BDS, that is to say boycotting Israel, is an illegal and punishable offense in France.)

In the same area, Macron also wants to ban foreign funding of European political parties, which strikes me as eminently sensible.

On immigration, Macron’s discourse reflects the usual incoherence of globalist politicians, who in principle are open to infinite immigration, but in practice are, after all, still in charge of rooted citizens and administrations for whom millions of unskilled and often violent migrants are actually a huge practical problem. Macron claims to want stronger pan-European border controls and a common asylum policy, so that the EU “protects both its values [read: ignoring borders] and its borders.” In practice, nothing will come of this as there is no European consensus on immigration and border enforcement is almost exclusively done by national authorities with national interests and incentives (e.g., Italy has an incentive to dump all their excess migrants on the rest of the Union).

Macron’s op-ed singles out Africa for special consideration:

A world-oriented Europe needs to look to Africa, with which we should enter into a covenant for the future, ambitiously and non-defensively supporting African development with investment, academic partnerships and education for girls.

“Education for African girls” is of course a well-known Alt-Right dog-whistle: both Emmanuel Macron and the Alt-Right have a shared objective of radically reducing African birth rates. (On a similar note, one of the most politically-correct and effective things we can do about The World’s Most Important Graph, in addition to educating African women, is to promote contraception/abortion rights and a minimal level of economic development in Sub-Saharan Africa.)

Finally, Macron proposes that a “Conference for Europe” be organized with citizen panels and debates so as to launch a reform of the European treaties (the EU’s de facto constitution). That should be a big ol’ mess.

The EU is a good example of both the inexorable logic of globalism and the insurmountable reality of nations and states. Yes, individuals and businesses want to work across borders, as much as possible, in the name of individual interest and collective efficiency. But, even within Europe, among comparable nations with basically the same ideology and outlook, it is extraordinarily difficult to then govern and make something coherent of this borderless “space.” Because the German and French peoples, not to mention all the others, do not talk to each other, have their own mentality and rhythm, and the various national oligarchies use what remains of the nation-state to defend their own selfish pecuniary and institutional interests. That’s called, going nowhere fast.

The EU only works if democratic politics is studiously limited to “consensus” among deracinated elites in Brussels and Frankfurt. Said consensus must be as vague and opaque as possible to prevent the citizens of any country from becoming upset and blocking the whole process. The other way is simply to hand over autocratic power – our “democrats” speak of “independent” institutions of “experts” – who can do things without effective democratic accountability, as with the EU’s competition authorities and central bank. The EU then is torn between indecision and unaccountability.

Case in point, Macron’s op-ed is conspicuously silent on the eurozone, the EU’s most ambitious and, not coincidentally, dysfunctional attempt at federalization. Politico’s European edition (generally a solid source of EU coverage) observes that cross-border lending has declined and national financial regulators are clawing back powers (notably in moving to bail out their own banks, and thus, their own citizens’ savings), preventing a coherent pan-eurozone approach.

What’s more, national governments have been pushing more and more localist measures to the detriment of European common market: France is restricting Central European truckers (who don’t have the same wages or social charges as French ones), while some Central European countries have imposed taxes on foreign-owned European companies or tried to force supermarkets to buy local. Confederacies of divided sovereignty, like the EU or the Antebellum United States enjoy a fragile and fluctuating unity, according to the attitudes of their constituent parts. Or as Macron himself says, EU integration is “a daily commitment.”

I make this point a lot, but it bears repeating: autocratic governments are generally better able to manage multiethnic societies than are democratic ones, where each ethno-national ego is free to develop and tear the commonwealth apart.

Macron is at his most persuasive not in defending the European Union but in denouncing petty-nationalism as a dead end:

Retreating into nationalism offers nothing; it is rejection without an alternative. And this is the trap that threatens the whole of Europe: the anger mongers, backed by fake news, promise anything and everything. . . . What country can act on its own in the face of aggressive strategies by the major powers? Who can claim to be sovereign, on their own, in the face of the digital giants? . . . We can’t let nationalists with no solutions exploit people’s anger. We can’t sleepwalk to a diminished Europe.

This kind of argument will naturally resonate with the metropolitan types, whether they be corporate managers, academics, or idealists, who cannot see how their nation alone can remain relevant in the world. While a willful small nation can certainly maintain its identity on its own, the metropolitans certainly have a point. And while it’s true that Macron’s vision does not jive with most Frenchmen – over half have not even heard of his “European Renaissance” initiative – the educated folks matter a great deal. (The Guardian version of the op-ed was shared 19,000 times on Facebook.)

We need to conciliate nationalism and Europeanism: a European nationalism, in harmony with the reality and sentiments of each nation, defending indigenous Europeans’ collective identity and interests in the world.

Macron concludes his plea: “It is for you to decide whether Europe and the values of progress that it embodies are to be more than just a passing episode in history.” But how could Europe, a 3000-year old civilization, with deeper roots still, be a mere “passing episode”? Macron’s Europe is not ours. As the identitarian think-tanker Jean-Yves Le Gallou said in a viral video on European identity (English subtitles available):

Europe is not the Brussels organization [the EU], nor a currency or a central bank. Europe is not a globalized and borderless space. Europe is not the African world, nor is it an Islamic land. . . . Europe is the continent of the Europeans.

Macron at least encourages us to think big for Europe, but we ought to go further. The identitarian writer Guillaume Faye, who recently passed way, wrote in his influential classic Archeofuturism:

Some of my positions in this book, in favor of a United States of Europe or a Euro-Siberian Federation, may shock some. But hear me out: I am not an advocate of this mollusk-like Europe of the treaty of Amsterdam [of 1997], nor an enemy of France. . . . To not disappear, our people, whether living in Toulouse, Rennes, Milan, Prague, Munich, Antwerp, or Moscow, needs to return and resort to ancestral virility. . . . Let us conceive the inconceivable.[1]Guillaume Faye, L’Archéofuturisme (Paris: L’Æncre, 2011), pp. 16-17.

Notes

[1] Guillaume Faye, L’Archéofuturisme (Paris: L’Æncre, 2011), pp. 16-17.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Alt Right, Emmanuel Macron, EU, France, Immigration 
Hide 89 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. “Macron has been reading Steve Sailer” that’s batshit insane.

    Whatever he reads comes from the (((aides))), DGSE, and on a lucky day, DRM.

  2. This is an incredibly stupid article and I hope for the author’s sake that he is being sarcastic. Macron is a neoliberal managerialist. He is willing to do the minimum required legwork to make the system work. It isn’t because he is “ourguy”.

    He has just bent his knee to Zionist pressure to include criticism of Israel as ‘anti-semitism’ even as he lectures Europeans on the supposed dangers of nationalism. He has made it his mission to oppose Orban among others.

    This kind of cuck take -“he’s secretely based” – was also pushed by Richard Spencer and it massively blew up in his face. To still push it today requires a special kind of idiocy.

  3. Franz says:

    We need to conciliate nationalism and Europeanism: a European nationalism, in harmony with the reality and sentiments of each nation, defending indigenous Europeans’ collective identity and interests in the world.

    Might be a bit late for that, whatever Macaroni does or fails to do.

    The Ku Klux Klan was called “The Invisible Empire” in the days when it tried to protect Europeans’ identity in a certain nation. They eventually failed because there was an earlier, far bigger and intensely richer Invisible Empire already loose and flush with cash.

    That particular Invisible Empire runs all the places in the world where Europeans live, and they know it well enough that they can afford to be lots more visible now.

    Europeans, wherever they might be, simply love to pick fights with each other so much (over region, sex, age, and whatever else) that they cannot stay focused. Who dithers dies out. Our rulers know this.

    • Replies: @Wally
  4. Macron in desperation is blabbing insane stupidity, still firmly aligned with Globalization.
    Pretty transparent, if you ask me.

    • Agree: Beefcake the Mighty
  5. Macron is at his most persuasive not in defending the European Union but in denouncing petty-nationalism as a dead end:

    “Retreating into nationalism offers nothing; it is rejection without an alternative. And this is the trap that threatens the whole of Europe: the anger mongers, backed by fake news, promise anything and everything. . . . What country can act on its own in the face of aggressive strategies by the major powers? Who can claim to be sovereign, on their own, in the face of the digital giants? . . . We can’t let nationalists with no solutions exploit people’s anger. We can’t sleepwalk to a diminished Europe.”

    interesting analysis .. thanks. GD..
    but.. the problem is not in Europe or the East or the West or the South or the North, it is instead universal to all of the Armed rule making nation state structures (ARMS) no matter which XXX ism it selects.. The problem is the wrong smart people have taken charge of the ARMS (Nation States) and they have used the rule of law to make it impossible for anyone else to step into their shoes; elections are limited to select candidates, etc. and conducted in a funnel that returns to the center of power, no matter the outcome of elections, the same people.
    IMO, its not up to Macron or any body else to make a bid to change the EU.. or to continentalize Europe.. that’s a job for the people who live there..the right to self determination is a collective authority that far exceeds the authority of any state (ARMS). The governed through-out the world don’t need a smart educated leader with an army of bureaucrats to whip the governed into compliance, or to impose on the governed goals that are not goals of the majority. Instead leaders should be elected to bring into being structures, functions and resources that adhere to, and accommodate the will of the majority of the governed.. Seems to me that is what the Yellow Jackets are about?
    The collective right to self determination is a universal human right which the rulers in charge of the armed rule making structures called nation states or unions of nation states have quashed for far too long.
    Humanity needs one world, one race, one religion, one purpose.. the function of the leaders should be to render the best quality of life to the will and dictates of the majority and to make sure everyone’s right to life, liberty and justice are fully protected. Its not up to the leaders to decide what should be done, its the job of leaders to make sure the decision of the people is delivered.

  6. neutral says:

    needs to return and resort to ancestral virility

    Sure and some childless faggot married to a woman much older than him is going to lead the way.

  7. “Europe”, the EU, is a trap. It’s stuck — can’t go back, won’t go forward. (And with the Euro, that albatross around the collective throat, choking everyone except the Germans…going back is near inconceivable. The British may be pretty stupid at the moment, but they were utter geniuses not to stick their head in the Euro noose).
    Perhaps, in some ideal world, a United States of Europe might be possible: ie not just a monetary, but a fiscal union. A genuine democracy, not just a romper room for those “uncountable” “Experts”.
    Not that anyone, elites & citizens, actually want such a “democracy”.

  8. For the love of God, what the hell was the point of this?

    If there is one thing which instantly marks any politician, writer, or commentator as nothing but a shit-lipped and sackless moron and a piece of subhuman garbage whose idiotic face ought to be redesigned with a spade shovel, it is his support, tacit or explicit, for any project involving “lowering African birthrates” through abortion, contraception, economic development, and the education of women.

    If it were not bad enough that the so-called cultural warriors of the Alt-Right would now, without skipping a beat, prescribe the same progressive poison which the West has imbibed these several centuries hence, and which they otherwise roundly denounce, as an antidote to African problems (which are only problems for the overtense brains of insulated Western intellectuals—the Africans don’t regard them as problematic at all), then it is positively ridiculous that these same vaunted “race realists” would sycophantically latch onto a project involving educating Africans to be developed and infertile Western copycats, and repose in such a fantastic scheme their hopes for ameliorating a demographic catastrophe, when a moment ago they were reaching for the pseudo-languages of IQ and genetics to explain how the descendants of Africans in America were all incorrigible brutes whom 500 years amongst their natural superiors were powerless to better.

    And if there could be any enormity to rival the moral wretchedness of proposing abortion as the key to a happy and prosperous future, it is the preposterous notion of some secular missionary traipsing about in the African hinterlands, preaching pill-popping and penis-wrapping and rights for women, only to be followed by some Alt-Right hobbledehoy who, while confessing his agreement with the general aims of the project, forthwith proceeds to disquisition to the tribesman on the benefits of tribalism, and loudly proclaims patriarchy and traditional sex roles to the Big Men, meanwhile the confused African quite sensibly concludes that these two figures are both monstrous evils whose only value lies in the cooking pot.

    No further evidence is needed to verify the claim that Alt-Rightism is really just an extremely late stage of Frankfurtian progressivism wherein the echoes of Marcusa and Mead still reverberate beneath the general din. The simultaneous fascination with primitive sexology and techno-Utopianism, the constant recursion to utilitarian justifications, the Darwinism and Socialism and Scientism, are all quite characteristic, not of any generally advancing mankind, but of a peculiarly Western senility.

  9. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    The EU is full of africans and asiatics that the colonialist England and France brought unnecesarily to Europe so that the french and english elites can exploit the ex-empires .

    The EU is full of middle east refugees from the american oil wars to which german traitor Merkel opended the doors .

    The EU resembles the IV Reich , with a Germany openly racist towards south and east
    europeans ( as usual ) while treacherously opens the doors to islamics . With a tricky Germany and Holland who are the sole beneficiaries from the euro while they ruin the rest of Europe

    The EU has lost her Christian roots , her spine ; and has degenerated into a socialdemocrat effeminated fluffy society full of ruinous entitlements inspired by the toxic nordics , by the french laicity , by utter greed and cowardly .

    The UE is militarily occupied by the USA . The US , provoked the Yugoslavian and Ucranian wars in the heart of Europe , the invasion of Russia by Georgia . The US sabotages and humiliates the European economies by imposing limits to our trade with other countries

    The USA still lives in the happy old times of the cold war and tries to maintain the iron curtain to block paneuropean relations with Russia , and sometimes one would think the the USA would love to have another big war in Europe , surely the english would agree .

    So, the situation is very bad , the EU is at the verge of collapse , the people is deeply demoralized and resentful , and the US ( that european excretion that thought was unique and special ) is even worse . It looks like the 500 years of world domination by the europeans are ending . A culture , a continent that produced two world wars in just 3 decades in the first half of the XX century , who sent his people , military and civilians to die in the trenches and under the bombs , a continent that produced the perverse french and communist revolutions , does not deserve much , such degrees of evil can not go unpunished . End of eurocentrism .

    I tried to read Macron `s article , but after a few lines I was so bored I could not follow

  10. WHAT says:

    Plastic replica of a man tries to play with nationalist sentiment, circa 2019.

  11. m___ says:

    Macron Calls for “European Renaissance” in Controversial Alt-Right Pivot
    Guillaume Durocher • March 9, 2019 • 2,800 Words

    Great article, infusion of key ideas for a future world. The detour over Macron is granted. Suggested alternative title:

    Inspired thinking of Guillaume Durocher on what a future EU[1] scenario can be.

    [1] Integration into a planetary concept of rule must be worked out urgently, especially seen the time-frame constraints on toxicity, global growing populations, migrations. And on the positive side, AI (big data and the possibilities of curing then sorting, only then dumping on the public policy). the inspiring work on poly-genic reading (a big data challenge for the larger part), and cross-fingers, gene editing, or at least exponential generational jumps in human nature by selective embryo matching. Thus allowing for time travel, and build acceleration into the Universe.[2]

    [2] Guillaume[3] is late on this, and the world of thought of the public ill adapted to the niche public of unz.com. This is an article that will catch lower commenting and reading. It should be archived as a snippet anchored to it’s time of propagation because of it’s core meaningfulness, not word count or comment count.

    [3] Exotic sourcing of Guillaume The Rock is a great mental stimulus for Anglo Americans to realize that Europe can do it’s own thinking.

  12. Miro23 says:

    A very good article. To make a family work, all family members need to identify with that family and contribute. In return they are supported and protected by that same family.

    Can the people of Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals be considered a family?

    Personally I think that they can. They have an identity that was formed in Middle Ages Christendom with its long fight against Arab Islam from the south and Asian nomadic invasions from the East.

    From this point of view Europeans need to;

    1) Abandon the idea of Brexit, Frexit etc. and the empty dream of a return to a 1950’s -60’s Golden Age.

    2) Source European products in Europe. In other words, give an ultimatum to European Asian outsourcing businesses. If these corporations can’t survive without cheap Asian production then let them go bankrupt.

    3) Prepare the European workforce for production in Europe. This is a major undertaking, and would have to cover everything currently done in Asia from electronics to clothing. Inevitably products would cost more – but equally there would be more income in Europe to pay for them.

    4) Give the whole of Europe a serious border with Swiss type controls. Search out, arrest and deport any non-European illegals without appeals, tribunals, refugee status etc.

    5) Completely halt the flow of cheap immigrant labour into Europe. Again this will be very difficult for whole economic sectors (e.g. agriculture, food processing, restaurants/hotels) and the unemployed will have to start taking these jobs – which also means that a lot of services will become more expensive – and maybe not so good.

    6) Accept that international Jewry has its own higher loyalty to Israel and its own international ethnic group, which can often be actively anti-ethnic European. Consequently Jews need to recuse themselves from European politics and return to being a rich and successful European minority. Despite the cries of racism, anti-semitism, fascism, Nazis etc. the reality is that they don’t have a primary loyalty to ethnic Europeans, or see ethnic Europeans as their community.

    If Europe could start functioning along these lines, income inequality would fall, employment would increase, skills would be developed, and new industries of all types allowed to grow without being strangled by 60c an hour Asian competition.

  13. Anonymous[201] • Disclaimer says:

    Macron – The Economist’s fool in Elysée.

  14. “Never since the Second World War has Europe been so essential. Yet never has Europe been in such danger.”

    Just what does the (almost literally) mother-fucker mean by that?

    Does he mean the physical Continent? Obviously not, it will be there long after he has gone.

    Does he mean the various countries of Europe? The often millennia old groupings and arrangements that the indigenous peoples created for themselves and have fought and died for with the goal of best furthering their interests and that of their kin and posterity? Now there he may have a point.
    Those time tested, honored and loved by their inhabitants institutions are under threat by the political filth of Europe.

    No, what Macron means by “Europe” is the haphazard slapdash slick of corruption vomited onto Europe in Brussels by the wide boys, spivs and chancers such as himself.

  15. RobRich says: • Website

    The Libertarians are the only ones doing anything effective, e.g. spreading the US Bill of Rights and capitalist (and voluntary eco-socialist small-community) concepts in these developing countries, building a growing libertarian fandom there that is pro-USA, in turn paving the way for more High-IQ babies, even getting China and much of Africa to cut taxes and make nice and be tolerant of different lifestyles.

    Libertarians are having 4 kids per couple in the US and 3 elsewhere, compared to the declining <1.5 far-left and Islamofascist birthrates. Conservatives need to wake up.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  16. Anon43 says:

    So Macron says France has attained ‘the protection of social rights’? Sure, but with a few minor exceptions. For instance, wear a Free Palestine t-shirt in public and get arrested for it. Protest taxes and get your eye shot out or your hand blown off. Hell, if that’s “social rights” I would hate to see what outright oppression would look like on the streets of France.

    This Paris graffiti sums it up:

    “Macron est un enculé pour les juifs.”

  17. anon[393] • Disclaimer says:

    whites are not objecting to the creative disruption of capitalism the least of us understand its long term benefits event to us. we also don’t object to international trade.
    whats objected to is globalisms retarded short sighted practices practices that become that way because the left has captured capitalism and because the left is run by jews who hate whites and their nations,
    so what happens is cuck treasonous whites are offered deals where they can offshore all our industrial might to foreign enemies and import foreign enemies to do the work that can be offshored. yeah sure the resulting inflation taxes unemployment is annoying but thats an aside whats infuriating is its not only going to fuck current whites up now but it is literally burning down the world it simply cant continue the entire world will be venezuella and south africa. the soviets recovered from communism in decades they may never recover from jew capitalism.
    whites are perfectly capable of solving for AI robotics etc we can trade without subsidizing our enemies and genociding our people.

  18. anonymous[389] • Disclaimer says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Lol! Was that an attempt at showing everyone how pretentious you can be?

    If there is one thing which instantly marks any politician, writer, or commentator as nothing but a shit-lipped and sackless moron and a piece of subhuman garbage whose idiotic face ought to be redesigned with a spade shovel, it is his support, tacit or explicit, for any project involving “lowering African birthrates” through abortion, contraception, economic development, and the education of women.

    Knowing the racist douche you are, this was surprising to say the least. Perhaps sarcasm?

  19. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thulean Friend

    Can’t agree more. The author read an MSM article written by Macron’s handlers and drew ridiculous conclusions about the guy’s true motives and “passion”. Is he that naive or a shill? Either way this was a waste of my time.

  20. anonymous[389] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    It looks like the 500 years of world domination by the europeans are ending .

    You lament as if world domination should be a God given right for Eurapeans. World domination by a godless pagan empire is really a curse on mankind, as billions of your “coloured” pagan “brethren” (lol!) will find out, that along with stealing them blind, their masters also led them into the worst pits of Hellfire.

    A culture , a continent that produced two world wars in just 3 decades in the first half of the XX century , who sent his people , military and civilians to die in the trenches and under the bombs , a continent that produced the perverse french and communist revolutions , does not deserve much , such degrees of evil can not go unpunished .

    Nothing of what you mentioned is even remotely just comeuppance for the evil which is Eurape, and its bastard spawn. The real comeuppance will be an eternity in Hell for your pagan godless souls.

  21. Agent76 says:

    Mar 9, 2019 France, Venezuela, And Erik Prince! Is The Darkness Here?

    In this video, we go over everything from France, Venezuela, to Erik Prince, as well as take your calls!

    Sep 19, 2000 Euro-federalists financed by US spy chiefs

    The documents confirm suspicions voiced at the time that America was working aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain into a European state.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1356047/Euro-federalists-financed-by-US-spy-chiefs.html

  22. anonymous[389] • Disclaimer says:
    @Miro23

    They have an identity that was formed in Middle Ages Christendom with its long fight against Arab Islam from the south and Asian nomadic invasions from the East.

    You do understand that Christianity is founded on a man who is perhaps as semitic as those Arabs, and generally from the same lands too.

    The real identity of Christendom is pagan godlessness, so you fellows should have simply stuck with your pagan false deities… the Thors, Odins and Zeuses, etc. At least they appear to be whiteys like your kind. You would have fared “better,” spiritually speaking, just like the cultish Hindoos, with their own locally concocted deities.

    Perhaps other peoples around the world would not have accepted your pagan deities (like hardly any outsider accepts the imaginary Vishnu/Shiva…), but is having a whole lot of Christians around the world, actually helping your kind in any way?

    • Replies: @Miro23
  23. Mulegino1 says:

    In other respects, Eurocratic rhetoric is generally not in line with reality. The EU remains almost a geopolitical nullity – notwithstanding some influence, usually misused, in its immediate neighborhood among North African and Eastern European states – rather justifying Léon Degrelle’s passionate assertion that “the small, miserable Europe of this impoverished common market cannot bring men happiness.”

    The full quote:

    I sometimes made huge mistakes. But what actually is a mistake in politics? And when I look back, I have only one sentiment: an enormous regret. Regret that we did not
    succeed, that we were not able to create this European world which would be the master of the universe for all time, which made the white race the first race, with the great mastery of the spirit.

    And when we see what there is on the other side, what 30 years of the others’ victory has given, this anarchy in the world, this rout of the white world, this desertion throughout the universe; when we see in our own countries the decay of morals, the fall of the fatherland, the fall of the family, the fall of social order;
    when we see this appetite for material goods which has replaced the great flame of the ideal which animated us, well then, truly, between the two we chose the right side. The small, miserable Europe of today, of this impoverished Common Market, cannot give happiness to men. Consumer society poisons humanity rather than elevating it.

    So, for our part, we dreamed of something great, and we have only one desire, that this spirit be reborn. And with all my might, up to the last moment of my existence, I will fight for this. So that what was our struggle and our martyrdom, will one day be the resurrection.

    Leon de Grelle

    That Europe- the Europe that could produce men such as Degrelle- has almost vanished from the pages of time

    May we hope for a real “Renaissance” of Europe- Christian Europe- Christendom? Not while mental and moral midgets like Macron, May and Merkel rule there. Trump and his Zio-mania are bad enough here in the US, but that particular troika is nauseating in the extreme.

    Delenda est Judea!

  24. anonymous[389] • Disclaimer says:
    @Miro23

    Arab Islam

    And yes, there is nothing Arab specific to Islam.

    Islam is true monotheism. There is no God, but God. Period.

    True Monotheism is timeless, and for all mankind… from Adam(pbuh), to the last men/women to inhabit this earth.

  25. jeppo says:

    A Euro-Siberian Federation is a worthy goal. The expansion of NATO and the contraction of the EU plays into this endgame.

    Montenegro joined NATO in 2017 and “North Macedonia” is set to join this year. Serbia is next, and once the Western Balkans are mopped up NATO will be looking to expand into Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus and the final prize, Russia itself.

    Britain is set to leave the EU this month. This will greatly strengthen the American geopolitical position, with their new British cat’s paw, in relation to the now-continental EU, and alter the fundamental cleavage within NATO from North America vs Europe to the Anglosphere vs the Continent.

    Germany, France and other continental powers will naturally want to regain their lost political and economic influence by expanding eastward in NATO’s wake. Only by including all of Eastern Europe and Russia can a future EU hope to compete with a US-led Anglosphere and a rising China.

    If and when the EU swallows E. Europe and Russia, the post-communist nations will form a majority of both member states and population in the new Euro-Siberian Federation. Then, finally, the nationalist and nativist Easterners will hold the whip hand over the globalist Westerners.

    But the Western Europeans will already be turning away from globalism as a reaction against the more open societies of the competing Anglosphere. Though they will be formally allied under the NATO umbrella, the Americans and Euro-Siberians will drift apart ideologically.

    It seems unlikely now that Russia, with it’s superpower pretensions, could be absorbed by the EU. But a post-Putin Russia might decide that being first among equals in a Euro-Siberian Federation dominated by Slavs and other Eastern Euros is preferable than going it alone, or worse, with a bunch of Central Asian stans.

    Russia would make up the bulk of Euro-Siberia’s land area, it would have the largest population, the most powerful military, and potentially the largest economy in the Federation. Most importantly, it could lead the nationalist pushback against the globalism of the Anglos and the West Euros.

    • Replies: @Miro23
  26. “… and market regulation (witness all the scroll-bars appearing on your favorite websites following the passage of the EU General Data Protection Regulation [GDPR]).”

    Yes, what stunning progress: First, I go through months of inanity being lectured by pricey lawyers on how our systems and processes will need to be modified to comply with GDPR, the costs of which only serve to diminish the assets of the clients purported to be protected by GDPR, and then when I attempt to read a little news from other parts of the world, my access to an increasing number of websites from around the world is blocked because they don’t want to be sucked into the GDPR regime. Scroll bars? Only in the EU. Many of my faves now block me. You may infer your own thoughts as to who really benefits from the EU regulatory regime.

    As for channeling the alt-Right, Macron is actually channeling Andrew Doyle, AKA Titania McGrat:

    “For too long, bigots have hidden behind the outdated principle of ‘free speech’ in order to justify expressing the wrong opinions. Free speech is a dangerous Western ideology invented by fascists to spread hate. A kind of hate spatula, if you will.”

    • Replies: @Anon
  27. anonymous[389] • Disclaimer says:
    @RobRich

    Islamofascist

    Lol! What is so bad about strictly establishing the absolute hegemony of the Almighty One on all mankind, as opposed to the hegemony of degenerate supremacist self-worshipping cults, the Whiteyfacists?

  28. @Anon

    american oil wars

    This is a canard.

    Oil in the Middle East has long since been nationalized. Wars where we got oil as the prize of war would actually be an improvement over the current crazed, ideological crusades.

    The “refugees” (70% fighting-age men) are not fleeing “oil wars.” They are fleeing dysgenic, dystopic Big Man societies where they are pure surplusage. These countries should either be walled off or just flat out conquered, with land and war brides distributed to the invaders. Since we’re not going to do that, we should let them stew in the hope that actual, serious countries emerge one day.

    • Agree: Wally
  29. Replace Macron with Le Pen.

  30. Miro23 says:
    @jeppo

    Russia would make up the bulk of Euro-Siberia’s land area, it would have the largest population, the most powerful military, and potentially the largest economy in the Federation. Most importantly, it could lead the nationalist pushback against the globalism of the Anglos and the West Euros.

    There are already plenty of Russians in Western Europe, and they fit better than the masses of Moslems and Africans. They’re well educated and have the same formative history in medieval Christendom (but from the Orthodox side).

    Russians are plainly European (not Asian), and Russia forming part of a European Federation would solve Western Europe’s energy and raw material needs, and, as you say, bring a more traditional outlook to SJW Europe. The Ukraine also belongs in Europe – which could usefully pave the way for tossing out their Neo-Nazi US sponsored regime.

    The corollary would be that the Anglo/US world continues along the Zio-Globalist route, since, after all, they were the ones that developed it (Neo-liberalism + SJW), and see where that leads.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    , @Wally
  31. @Miro23

    Well-thought-our ideas, sir, and urgently needed. I’d add that all white European people (and more-mixed people who are still predominantly of our racial and civilizational background) are bound by genetics and centuries of close cultural ties, common interests, and common principles, in Europe and Russia but also including those of us in North America (USA and Canada).

  32. @anonymous

    True monotheism is the recognition of a singular, impersonal universal consciousness to which we all belong. Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all suffer the fatal flaw of creation by man. And with human design comes bias. And with bias comes the ridiculous notion that an energy that can create the universe and complex life forms like human beings is listening to your prayers and choosing your belief system over others. The three religions mentioned above have positive qualities, but they mostly serve as intellectual and spiritual cages.

    • Replies: @m___
  33. @Miro23

    What you write makes sense. Russia and the Ukraine should be integrated into Europe for the reasons you describe. But Russia as boogeyman enriches elites who have financial and political interests in military spending and NATO’s continued existence.

  34. @Intelligent Dasein

    Not sure about this. Progress = education = prosperity = decreased fertility. There are no exceptions in history.

    You can certainly question the motives (and I’m sure many will question the potential effectiveness in that region, given previous attempts and various other indicators), but there’s really nothing but potential benefits to the entire world from a more educated and consequently less fecund African population.

    • Agree: Guillaume Durocher
    • Replies: @m___
  35. ‘…because it is European civilization that unites, frees and protects us…’

    The difficulty here is that ‘European civilization’ is at least partly an illusion.

    Is Sicily really so much more like Norway than it is like Tunisia? Which does Greece resemble more? Denmark, or Turkey? Do Romanians really make better Britons than Pakistanis do? Do Latvians fit right into Portugal whilst Brazilians don’t?

    Perhaps — but is it all that clear-cut? The larger the measure of unity — in this case, the entire European sub-continent — the less meaningful it becomes.

  36. @Colin Wright

    I agree there is clinal ethno-cultural variation both within Europe and between Europe and MENA. Romania, for instance, has in many respects more in common with Turkey than with Britain, despite the division between Orthodoxy and Islam (I disagree that Pakistanis make better Britons than [non-Gypsy] Romanians, however). There’s a case for maintaining intra-European diversity and I am not particularly happy to see the native French, English, Germans, and Nords be swamped out. Still, Europe is also a meaningful civilizational and genetic unit, or cluster, a family of nations and, in my view, this family ought work together to oppose their decay and decline.

    • Replies: @Anon
  37. Wally says:
    @Franz

    said:
    “Europeans, wherever they might be, simply love to pick fights with each other so much (over region, sex, age, and whatever else) that they cannot stay focused. Who dithers dies out. Our rulers know this.”

    IOW:
    “Those who do not protect & nurture their own are destined to be ruled by those who do.”

    • Replies: @Franz
    , @Ilyana_Rozumova
  38. Wally says:
    @Miro23

    said:
    “The Ukraine also belongs in Europe – which could usefully pave the way for tossing out their Neo-Nazi US sponsored regime.:

    Please explain your use of “neo-Nazi”.

    It is particularly curious since the original “Nazis” clearly did not do what is alleged of them.

    I’m afraid you are suffering from Zionist indoctrination.

    http://www.codoh.com

  39. The EU lacks democratic control. that’s best executed in the nation-state. Therefore – with Isaiah Berlin: For a Europe of nation Staes – and not for a United States of Europe.

    M.Durocher – that Macron reads Steve Sailer is plausible indeed, if I think about it. – Since I do – how could I explain, that others don’t. Just because I’m less powerful could explain it, but not necessarily so. So – I just want to say, that your idea astounded me.

  40. Mulegino1 says:

    European Renaissance, circa 1940:

    European “Renaissance” circa 2019:

    https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=conchita+wurst

  41. Miro23 says:
    @Colin Wright

    Perhaps — but is it all that clear-cut? The larger the measure of unity — in this case, the entire European sub-continent — the less meaningful it becomes.

    I think that there’s some confusion here. A European Confederation isn’t the United States of Europe (USE).

    If the USA became a Confederation of American States, individual states would raise and spend most of their own taxes, have active citizen participation and referenda on important issues (i.e. they would be a lot more independent). Washington would have a much smaller role and the Presidency would have little power.

    California would make laws suitable for California, and Ohio would make laws suitable for Ohio and they would both contribute their referendum votes (all citizens) on national issues.

    Similarly Russia would have its laws and budget separate from France, and one would not be expected to subsidize the other. They could however, each have local referenda on European level issues that go towards a final European decision binding on all (i.e. the link between the individual citizen and final decisions issue by issue would not be lost).

    It would no doubt be cumbersome, time consuming and expensive but it would be real Democracy.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  42. Miro23 says:
    @anonymous

    The real identity of Christendom is pagan godlessness, so you fellows should have simply stuck with your pagan false deities… the Thors, Odins and Zeuses, etc. At least they appear to be whiteys like your kind. You would have fared “better,” spiritually speaking, just like the cultish Hindoos, with their own locally concocted deities.

    The way it worked, was that the late Roman Empire was already Christian (conversion of Emperor Constantine 312 AD) when it finally fell to the “barbarians”. The barbarians adopted Christianity since 1) it came with an educated administration who could read and write (Latin) 2) it was an effective form of social control 3) the Church was happy to ally with the barbarian leaders and gain their protection.

    The Church also usefully had its own organization that reached across most of Europe and the Middle East (and defined Christendom). For example, Palladius from Gaul (France) brought Christianity to Ireland, Kievan Rus (Russia)was converted to Christianity by Greek missionaries from Byzantium, and it was Augustine from Rome, who led the Gregorian Mission that founded the English Church.

  43. m___ says:
    @SunBakedSuburb

    Indeed. Giving importance to religion is an intellectual trap institutionalized. It only serves psychological sedition, and deters from rational overview. Ideally to serve it’s purpose as a glue, religion can retain the ritualistic, the musical and tonal binds, the magnanimous Cathedrals and Latin as an antidote to porn and soccer in the Euro minds of us deplorables.

    Elites should steer away from leaning on the above before anything else. Real progress is top inspired and is agnostic to consumerism (the First religion of the day), and the minor other four or five.

  44. m___ says:
    @Sollipsist

    It is not that it has not been tried? Do you not agree, you do not have do, now do you.

  45. Yet another confirmation of a joke: “Macron wants to be like Putin, but the leash gets in the way”.

    • LOL: Digital Samizdat
  46. @Intelligent Dasein

    The great Waugh made your point, both more elegantly and very much more amusingly, in Black Mischief, way back in 1932:

    The opposition to the pageant was firm and widespread. The conservative party rallied under the leadership of the Earl of Ngumo. This nobleman, himself one of a family of forty-eight (most of whom he had been been obliged to assassinate on his succession to the title) was the father of over sixty sons and uncounted daughters. This progeny was a favorite boast of his: in fact he maintained a concert party of seven minstrels for no other purpose than to sing at table about this topic when he entertained friends. Now in ripe age, with his triumphs behind him, he found himself like some scarred war veteran surrounded by pacifists, his prestige assailed and his proudest achievements held up to vile detraction. The new proposals struck at the very roots of sport and decency and he expressed the general feeling of the landed gentry when he threatened amid loud grunts of approval to dismember any man on his estates whom he found using the new-fangled and impious appliances.

    The smart set, composed (under the leadership of Lord Boaz) of cosmopolitan blacks, courtiers, younger sons and a few of the decayed Arab intelligentsia, though not actively antagonistic, were tepid in their support: they discussed the question languidly in Fifi’s salon and, for the most part, adopted a sophisticated attitude maintaining that of course they had always known about these things, but why invite trouble by all this publicity; at best it would only make contraception middle class. In any case this circle was always suspect to the popular mind and their allegiance was unlikely to influence public opinion in the Emperor’s favour.

    The Churches came out strong on the subject. No one could reasonably accuse the Nestorian [Christian] Patriarch of fanatical moral inflexibility — indeed there had been incidents in his Beatitude’s career when all but grave scandal had been caused to the faithful — but whatever his personal indulgence, his theology had always been unimpeachable. Whenever a firm lead was wanted on a question of opinion, the Patriarch had been willing to forsake his pleasures and pronounce freely and intransigently for the tradition he had inherited. There had been the ugly affair of the Metropolitan of Matodi who had proclaimed himself fourth member of the Trinity; … there was the painful case of the human sacrifices at the Bishop of Popo’s consecration — on all these and other uncertain topics the Patriarch had given proof of a sturdy orthodoxy.

    Now, on the question of birth control, his Beatitude left the faithful in no doubt as to where their duty lay. … the Patriarch composed an encyclical in rich, oratorical style and despatched copies of it by runners to all parts of the island. Had the influence of the established Church on the popular mind been more weighty, the gala should have been doomed, but as has already been mentioned the Christianising of the country was still so far incomplete that the greater part of the Empire retained with a minimum of disguise their older and grosser beliefs and it was, in fact, from the least expected quarter, the tribesmen and villagers, that the real support of Seth’s policy suddenly appeared.

    This development was due directly and solely to the power of advertisement. In the dark days when the prejudice of his people compassed him on every side and even Basil spoke unsympathetically of the wisdom of postponing the gala, the Emperor found among the books that were mailed to him monthly from Europe, a collection of highly inspiring Soviet posters. …

    Finally, there resulted a large, highly colored poster well calculated to convey to the illiterate the benefits of birth control. … Copies were placarded all over Debra-Dowa; they were sent down the line to every station latrine, capital and coast; they were sent into the interior to vice-regal lodges and headmen’s huts, hung up at prisons, barracks, gallows and juju trees, and wherever the post was hung there assembled a cluster of inquisitive, entranced Azanians.

    It portrayed two contrasted scenes. On one side a native hut of hideous squalor, overrun with children of every age, suffering from every physical incapacity — crippled, deformed, blind, spotted and insane; the father prematurely aged with paternity squatted by an empty cook-pot; through the door could be seen his wife, withered and bowed with child bearing, desperately hoeing at their inadequate crop. On the other side a bright parlour furnished with chairs and table; the mother, young and beautiful, sat at her ease eating a huge slice of raw meat; her husband smoked a long Arab hubble-bubble (still a caste mark of leisure throughout the land), while a single, healthy child sat between them reading a newspaper. Inset between the two pictures was a detailed drawing of some up-to-date contraceptive apparatus and the words in Sakuyu: WHICH HOME DO YOU CHOOSE?

    Interest in the pictures was unbounded; all over the island woolly heads were nodding, black hands pointing, tongues clicking against filed teeth in unsyntactical dialects. Nowhere was there any doubt about the meaning of the beautiful new pictures.

    See: on right hand: there is rich man: smoke pipe like big chief: but his wife she no good: sit eating meat: and rich man no good: he only one son.

    See: on left hand: poor man: not much to eat: but his wife she very good, work hard in field: man he good too: eleven children: one very mad, very holy. And in the middle: Emperor’s juju. Make you like that good man with eleven children.

    And as a result, despite admonitions from squire and vicar, the peasantry began pouring into town for the gala, eagerly awaiting initiation to the fine new magic of virility and fecundity.

  47. Beckow says:

    Macron is incoherent. People like him pop up towards the end of an era in a desperate attempt to square a circle. It cannot be done. You either have borders or you don’t. Macronism cannot survive with migration restrictions, he is simply playing for time. Not a single globalist policy will ever change with Macrons in charge. (It is becoming clear that the policies won’t change with Trump in charge either.)

    I don’t care about African girls’ education. We should not tell them what to do, we need to keep our societies separate from theirs; they can read, breed or build golden Wakandas in the jungle – their lives, their choice. Macron’s throw-away lines are not a signal to nationalism, they are an attempt to pull us into his globalist mental world where what happens in Africa matters. It doesn’t, all we need is a border.

    The free trade rhetoric is also empty – the fact that self-serving players will abuse any free-trade regime was obvious from the beginning. To pretend to address it now is silly, you don’t let the fraudsters who created it to police it now.

    The ‘fake news’ and the endorsement of censorship is the real meat in Macron’s article. He is announcing that the discussion space needs to be shut down. They say it again and again to prepare the public so when it happens people kind of shrug their soldiers and don’t object. It is the byrocratic method that West has perfected so much – commission, planting of ideas, gradualism, and endless lying. In some way the more straightforward authoritarian approach is preferable.

    Macron will never change anything, he was hired to make it work better. He will fail at it, but there will be no change in direction.

    • Replies: @Digital Samizdat
  48. @Guillaume Durocher

    You don’t really believe what you’re saying or do you, William? Macron reading Sailer… now that’s an eye popper, if there ever was one!

    • Replies: @Dieter kief
  49. Icy Blast says:
    @Thulean Friend

    I can’t believe this article is sincere either. Maybe it’s an Onion-style parody. The author spends 2,800 words explaining what an under-appreciated political titan Macron is – a leader of such profound intelligence and talent that only the “educated classes” can perceive his greatness. If this Durocher guy wants to be taken seriously, he should come out and say this oleaginous mass of rhetorical vomit was a hoax. Either it’s a hoax, or he’s hoping to get a job with the BBC.

  50. @Miro23

    ‘I think that there’s some confusion here. A European Confederation isn’t the United States of Europe (USE)…’

    Uh huh. We suffered from a similar period of confusion. It was settled with the American Civil War — involving the death of a rather impressive percentage of the white male population of the losing side.

    You can, of course, assume that the ultimate outcome of the EU will be otherwise. Presumably, given the close cultural identity of Greece with Holland, and so on, your prospects are better.

    Hey: maybe those who value their identity and independence will just surrender. It could happen.

  51. little macaroon was/is a literal

    (((Rothschild))) employee.

    anything he says or does is on behalf

    of his (((paymaster))).

  52. EVROPA says:

    crowfunding a temple of the history of europe is what we need to do to start reconquering our countries.
    from the first aryans spreading around the world, to greeks bringing the world to a new age, romans giving europe its form , germans and french defeating the muslims and asiatic tribe and founding the middle ages, to spaniards reconquista and posterior colonization,to italian reinassance , to the russian expansion all across the steppe, to the french revolution and british industrialization and our children expansion in america and australia

    A cathedral forged in european stone remenbering the sacrifice of our ancestors , the heroes that defended it and that genious that impulsed our prosperity , statues of them and luminous paint of the big event of european history

    A cathedral dedicated to our common european history , a symbol of unity glory and strenght

    A materialized version of what we want to be in this times of uncertainty

    A humane and a real founding rock of the of european project against the desnaturalized version of the EU , lets hickjack them how EVROPA should be built

    • Replies: @Akedi
  53. EVROPA says:

    With only 10 million € would be enought to built a important part of the project that would finance itself after we built the first building or part of it .
    In this time of souless materialism it would became in the new santiago pilgrimage were the exhausted traveller found thenselfs with their true roots and regain hope of a better future.
    if a game has been capable of crowfunding 200 million im sure we could get at least 10 million .
    100€ per person would be enought , we could sell a little space write in the stone with your name linked eternally to the glory of our ancestors

  54. @Beckow

    You nailed it. No need for me to say anything on this subject.

  55. EVROPA says:

    The name could be the unfinshed temple making room to the future expansion that our descendants will built

    We could conect the past present and future making every generation conscient of their roots and what they should fight for

    It would be a compass built in stone for the future generation of evropeans

  56. @Intelligent Dasein

    You were too kind with our our oligarchs: education and development are paid only lip service by the venal cowards.

  57. @Reuben Kaspate

    On the other hand: Name me two other intellectuals who have definitely had a working idea about how to become the most powerful man in the world (=President of the United States).
    Steve Sailer is in the top five of my most important intellectuals worldwide. – See – – – and who am I? I mean: if dumb me can dig this, Macron for sure can dig this too. So, seen from that perspective…
    (And then there’s always the secret sauce, that makes rumors so interesting. And rumormongers and hearsayers and gossipers and and and …as well. That’s just who we are, by and large, if Dutton is right: Gossipers, isn’t it***?

    *** For those who doubt this and want more specific insights into our communication habits and how we finally became the self-reflective being who’s identities rest upon – not least, even – rational discourse: Read The Theory of Communicative Action. – I’m alright with that too.

  58. Franz says:
    @Wally

    “Those who do not protect & nurture their own are destined to be ruled by those who do.”

    Yes sir.

    Some places seem ruled by aliens in the USA already. The “dreamers” work in packs, very like the minorities already here. Europeans are all into individuality which is making us autistic in the face of any gang that knows better.

    All of these “minorities” also know which side the law will be on if there’s ever a contest.

  59. @Thulean Friend

    What article have you been reading? Durocher’s comments on Macron are mostly negative and he highlights where Macron’s views diverge from reality or his own position.

    The stupidity and narrow-mindedness of the boomer are only surpassed by his contentiousness, it seems.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Guillaume Durocher
  60. Akedi says:
    @EVROPA

    I think it would end up inauthentic. We have lost the skills and confidence of building like the Empires of old. We aren’t strong as a civilisation. I almost feel like we aren’t worthy. The buildings they made were useful to them at the time, not simply self-congratulating edifices (apart from relatively small monuments and statues.) The flair, size and beauty of their cities were symbols of how well their societies functioned and how powerful they felt as people. Us copying their styles now is bound to fall short, because we’re in the decline stage. I don’t want to build a mockery, or a masturbatory temple to the ashes of our civilisation, while our people are raped and killed without us being able to protect them.

    If this building is solely for celebrating our history… why not just go and look at our historical buildings, some of which are still standing after thousands of years? Why make a new thing to represent history? Our history is already staring us in the face all over Europe.

    When we have fallen and then risen again we will make beautiful and enormous buildings naturally. I think this would end up feeling modern and contrived tbh.

    • Replies: @EVROPA
  61. EVROPA says:
    @Akedi

    Our threat are real as the sentiment that would animate the construction of the first rocks of this spiritual noa arch that our descendants would finish in all its glory later on .
    If we want to survive we have to start thinking with multigenerational aproach.
    We need to start dreaming big reclaiming our own destiny

  62. @anonymous

    Islam is true monotheism. There is no God, but God. Period.

    Actually, there is no “God” at all. Deal with it.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
  63. @silviosilver

    Actually, there is a God, and He’s watching you. Deal with it.

    • Replies: @Anon
  64. I generally like Durocher’s stuff, but I agree with the general consensus that, if he really does take Macron seriously on anything, then he’s just being very naive.

  65. Anon[178] • Disclaimer says:

    Macron recently wrote an op-ed, translated in the various Europeans and published in newspapers across the continent, making his case for a reformed European Union. The text is interesting for the practical proposals, the implausible promises, and the persuasive arguments against a certain petty-nationalism.

    Macron is as trustworthy as a viper.

    No one should take anything that comes out of Macron’s mouth as anything but another scheme toward Europe’s deconstruction.

    Macron is undeniably a smart guy. Granted, his discourse is notoriously vague, frequently resorting to the expression “en même temps” (at the same time), describing both sides of an issue without pinning himself down.

    See above.

    On the other hand, Macron also has some idea of what doesn’t work in globalism and can’t help making the occasional politically-incorrect observation. Most productively, he has repeatedly called on black African women to breed less so as to reduce immigration to Europe.

    This comment can only be taken as disingenuous. Not a single African will have a single less child due to Macron’s comment.

    What is in within Macron’s influence, however, is border patrol and control to include a no-tolerance policy on human trafficking and border hopping by land and sea to Europe.

    No migrants must be rewarded with an continuous stay in Europe when they migrate by these methods. No migrants must be physically permitted to migrate by these methods. When Macron works toward these goals, only then can he be seen to have a concern over mass migration to Europe. Not before. Anything else is talking out of both sides of his mouth.

    What is further within Macron’s influence is for the EU to rescind the de facto open invitation that they have extended to non-European illegal migrants to come to Europe.

    What existed before was effective order controls and an effective message of “do not come”. Until Macron advocates to re-institute these controls then he is grandstanding and hypocritical.

    The boxer, [in] the video which he made before turning himself in, he was briefed by a far-left lawyer. It’s obvious! This guy, he doesn’t speak like a Gypsy. He doesn’t speak like a Gypsy boxer.

    So there you have it, Emmanuel Macron, ethnologue.

    Except that Macron’s use of ethnic ridicule of an obviously White boxer to defend his oppression of what are essentially White ethnic protests paints Macron as nothing but a superficially clever viper.

    It doesn’t actually help Macron in the eyes of the people, because most will see his comment as the tactic that it is and his supposedly derisive reference to the “far left” as disingenuous .

    As a matter of fact, all top French politicians – while paying lip-service to a notionally colorblind republic of equal and interchangeable citizens – are very conscious of the often ugly ethnic realities of France today. Former prime minister and then-mayor of Évry Manuel Valls, an ardent Zionist, once complained of the number of Africans and Muslims around while walking through his city: “a fine image of the city of Évry. . . . Could you put me a few Whites, a few Whites [in English], a few Blancos?”

    Unless Valls was a Zionist / philo-Semite with no knowledge of Judaism (which is unlikely for someone in his position), he was being disingenuous because Judaism specifically calls for the destruction of all other nations with special emphasis on Europe.

    François Hollande, a former Socialist president, has also made many statements recognizing the racial fragmentation and feelings in the country, even seeing the prospect of civil war and “partition” in the long run.

    In line with Judaism’s wishes for Europe as well as their prophecies. Note that Hollande did nothing to stem the increase in minority population.

    French politicians know that they shouldn’t make these statements in public and so usually these are off the record, but leak anyway.

    With all due respect: bullshit.

    Anything that was “accidentally leaked” was leaked on purpose in order to give the impression that these politicians were / are not actively and purposefully facilitating what they claim to supposedly lament in those “leaks”.

    Anyway, Macron is also relatively aware of what works and doesn’t work in the European Union.

    From my position, Macron gives the impression of the most politically failed politician in modern memory: given the extended Yellow Vest protests under his watch, which are obviously pre-revolutionary in nature.

    He acknowledges that the EU is too often indecisive and reduced to a “soulless market.” He opens his letter with candid admissions:

    Never since the Second World War has Europe been so essential.

    And Europe might ask in response: to what and whom is Europe essential to in Macron’s eyes?

    Macron does not seem to perceive that Europe is essential to Europe’s natives.

    Macron, like most elites that get any press, does seem to perceive that Europe is essential to African migrants as well as (the innately foreign) Jews. Primarily.

    How else might Europe be essential in the eyes of Macron?

    As a geographic bulwark in service of the (overwhelmingly Jewish and elite) hostility to Russia.

    As a role player in the (entirely made up but worshiped) Jewish myths that cite Europe’s eventual hostility toward Israel and its subsequent destruction.

    Europe will be driven toward this role and outcome because Jews see their fiction’s reality as necessary to bringing about their future period of world rule.

    We need to reform our competition policy and reshape our trade policy, penalizing or banning businesses that compromise our strategic interests and fundamental values such as environmental standards, data protection, and fair payment of taxes; and the adoption of a European preference in strategic industries and our public procurement, as our American and Chinese competitors do.

    A primary tactic of globalists is to frame all oppositional interest in terms of economics and then ignore what the opposition is actually stating about their ethnic priority.

    Personally I find all these measures quite reasonable: trade is only a means towards the kind of society you want (determined by your values) and should not compromise your sovereignty, that is to say your agency. Then again, I’m French. With the traditionally free-trading United Kingdom on the way out, and a recent protectionist turn among German big business, the EU may well turn against free trade or at least take a much more qualified position.

    The West is going to economically contract over the next generation (see Trump’s trade initiatives), with the US leading the way. This was and is not the idea of any single politician. This was an eventuality, and this decision was made long ago by much larger groups of men who run the world economy. Europe (and the world) has no choice but to follow. World changing economic policies are never made by politicians. This is the type of decision that finance, industry, and the military are heavily involved in. Macron’s comments aren’t born out of his reason. He is reading an essential script that any politician at this point in history would have to read.

    There is evidence that Macron has been reading Steve Sailer’s arguments in favor of “continentalism.” In order to protect and defend the interests of one’s citizens, you need borders, but Macron argues that these should be continental rather than national, on the grounds of Europe’s shared race values and civilization:

    Why should borders be continental? “Shared race values and civilization” is viper-speak with no significant foundation in reality. Wherever it does lightly touch reality, it is irrelevant to the overwhelming practical need for borders.

    Someone should remind Macron of the Thirty Years War and its eight million dead fought to bring about the nation state that stopped reckless imperial expansion and birthed the modern world.

    Without borders, Hungary and others would have no effective resistance to any ascending tyrant in Brussels. The recent class obviously having been corrupted by foreign interests that are hostile to Europe’s native people.

    A market is useful, but it should not detract from the need for borders to protect and values that unite. Nationalists are misguided when they claim to defend our identity by withdrawing from the EU, because it is European civilization that unites, frees and protects us.

    “Values that unite” is code for “no culture, no race, no peace, no respectable civilization”.

    Was Macron elected as the President of France, or the President of Europe?

    Advocating (and working) for the effective dissolution of the nation that you were elected to lead seems treasonous.

    International unity is not protection, but the opposite. As can be readily observed with the vast array of disenfranchised ethnicities in the United States who, even when greater in number, are effectively ruled for the interests of the smaller yet more powerful ethnicities.

    “European civilization…frees…us” is viper talk.

    First, there is no border-free unity now, and so Macron is speaking about some future-unity in the present tense as something that is supposedly foundational to Europe.

    In doing so, Macron speaks in absurdities.

    History refutes Macron’s claims in regard to the foundational nature of a continental unity; as modern Europe was born under the nation state. The nation concept, as held by the nationalists, being the thing that Macron suggests is misguided.

    Macron’s future “unity” is being heralded by an influx of millions of innately destructive and violent Africans, Arabs, and Turks into Europe.

    Macron’s “free” future is heralded by ever-increasing surveillance, police militarization, and terrorism.

    “Macron’s “free” future is heralded by ever-increasing social destruction at every level.

    Macron’s future was born of the Stasi and third internationalist communism. It was not born of Europe.

    There is no homogeneous “European civilization” in a civic nor cultural sense.

    So, again, Macron is speaking only in regard to an invention of his mind.

    Macron’s own letter lacks realism in many areas. He claims to want a “zero carbon” European economy by 2050, which strikes me as laughable.

    This is economic-contraction speak.

    The protection of “democracy,” with its “diversity of opinions,” requires according to Macron “European rules banishing incitement to hatred and violence from the internet, since respect for the individual is the bedrock of our civilization and our dignity.”

    To restate what everyone here knows: there is no freedom when the concept’s terms are regulated only to include the agenda of one party.

    Hence, in the name of the teetering EU’s notional democracy, Macron wants a pan-European censorship regime to crack down on all speech the State deems to be “hate” or “violence.”

    hate = speech that is against the interests and agendas of internationalist-communist favored groups.

    This is unsurprising coming from the man who seemingly wants to make ZOG literally true by formally criminalizing anti-Zionist speech in France. (By the way, BDS, that is to say boycotting Israel, is an illegal and punishable offense in France.)

    This ridiculous Orwellian proposal, on top of the BDS restriction, just means that Macron and the French government are Jewish puppets and they wish for the French people to read the government in this light.

    Its an unfortunate situation in the short term for the French people, but the long term optics for the Jewish government in France are horrific. Exposed power is not pure power.

    In the same area, Macron also wants to ban foreign funding of European political parties, which strikes me as eminently sensible.

    Except for the fact that the innately foreign Jewish power will be unquestionably excluded from those restrictions. Which makes them all but useless. With no restriction, at least Jews have some competition.

    Macron’s op-ed singles out Africa for special consideration:

    A world-oriented Europe needs to look to Africa, with which we should enter into a covenant for the future, ambitiously and non-defensively supporting African development with investment, academic partnerships and education for girls.

    Counterpoint: reduce food and other aid so as to reduce population growth fertilizer, and avoid entering the European people into a massive never-ending commitment to develop what cannot develop itself.

    “Education for African girls” is of course a well-known Alt-Right dog-whistle: both Emmanuel Macron and the Alt-Right have a shared objective of radically reducing African birth rates.

    Dog whistle or not, it will never be effective. As can be witnessed in the African birthrates in the US, where African girls get twice the education that they can ever hope to in even an Africa with full European support.

    Macron is intentionally avoiding doing what needs to be done in regard to Europe’s Africa and migration policies. Any of his supposedly contrarian speech is done to give a false impression of balance.

    (On a similar note, one of the most politically-correct and effective things we can do about The World’s Most Important Graph, in addition to educating African women, is to promote contraception/abortion rights and a minimal level of economic development in Sub-Saharan Africa.)

    It will never be enough. These people over-breed in every imaginable condition and circumstance.

    The EU only works if democratic politics is studiously limited to “consensus” among deracinated elites in Brussels and Frankfurt. Said consensus must be as vague and opaque as possible to prevent the citizens of any country from becoming upset and blocking the whole process.

    Which touches upon the possible motivation toward deracinating Europe.

    What’s more, national governments have been pushing more and more localist measures to the detriment of European common market: France is restricting Central European truckers (who don’t have the same wages or social charges as French ones), while some Central European countries have imposed taxes on foreign-owned European companies or tried to force supermarkets to buy local. Confederacies of divided sovereignty, like the EU or the Antebellum United States enjoy a fragile and fluctuating unity, according to the attitudes of their constituent parts. Or as Macron himself says, EU integration is “a daily commitment.”

    Tribal self interest follows race, which follows culture, which follows geographic separation over time.

    This fact has always been the fundamental stumbling block for international communism. This is the core reason why international communism preaches a never ending war. It is a never ending war on the human being, or human spirit, which will always strive to create an individual culture when geographically separated from other tribes. This culture evolves into a tribe and nation over time.

    I make this point a lot, but it bears repeating: autocratic governments are generally better able to manage multiethnic societies than are democratic ones, where each ethno-national ego is free to develop and tear the commonwealth apart.

    Of course. Democracy, insofar as it isn’t merely a long term tool of destruction in all circumstances, can only work in a homogeneous group who is voting not on the goal but on the method of attainment for the tribal goal(s) that have prior been agreed upon as a matter of ethnic alliance and shared culture.

    Any legitimate goal will invariably be for the maximum prosperity for the tribe. With maintenance of borders and avoidance of war being a necessary underyling secondary goals that preserve the tribe so that it can attain the primary prosperity goal.

    When democracy devolves into voting for what goals we will pursue, it essentially represents separate nations voting to see whose national interests will be pursued over those of the others.

    At that point, democracy is inherently invalid as a form of government. Today, that situation has reached a type of peak expression.

    Macron is at his most persuasive not in defending the European Union but in denouncing petty-nationalism as a dead end:

    Retreating into nationalism offers nothing; it is rejection without an alternative.

    That does not read like persuasion to me. That reads as a discount of facts that have the weight of history behind them.

    And this is the trap that threatens the whole of Europe: the anger mongers,

    And is it not a type of homicidal anger that motivates internationalist communists to allow terrorists and rapists into our nations so that their deconstruction goals can be accomplished?

    Do internationalist communists / Jews not have a long history of attempting to reframe as “anger” all self defense against their revolutionary, murderous, or otherwise nefarious schemes and politics?

    What validity, then, does the accusation have?

    backed by fake news,

    For international communists and Jews, “Fake News” has come to mean anything that contradicts their state propaganda and which refutes their narratives in general.

    The Fake News concept, as it is being used, is code for invalidating voter agency that is inherent in the discretion used to evaluate all information before casting a vote.

    “Fake News” is a new narrative describing the millenia old situation of competing narratives being put in front of voters. How that has always been handled is that voters use their agency and discretion to filter the information and then cast a vote that reflects their best understanding the reality and how that reality affects their self-interests. Exposure to competing narratives was never a valid excuse to imply that a voter’s agency was compromised. The concept is absurd and anti-democratic.

    This voter agency is fundamental to democracy, and its implied invalidation fundamentally implies the invalidation of votes.

    In essence, the Fake News narrative attempts to invalidate the votes that are counter to globalism.

    Its a form of soft totalitarianism, and possibly a precursor to an overt type of totalitarianism, with the fake news narrative of today being used to build manufactured consent on the Left and in the Center to nullify future elections.

    We need to conciliate nationalism and Europeanism:

    Why? Concessions are small losses toward a gradual total loss for the Right.

    As can be witnessed in any of the Left’s incrementalist tactics for virtually all of their agendas in the last 200 years.

    a European nationalism, in harmony with the reality and sentiments of each nation, defending indigenous Europeans’ collective identity and interests in the world.

    The defense of national identity will never happen in that circumstance. More pertinently, Brussels has spent all of its political currency and trust 10x over. There is no reason to trust anyone in Brussels who is advocating for Europeanism, and every reason to to dissolve their influence in total. Broken trust is not reparable in this circumstance, which is in-part why the mass African invasion was so perplexing to behold.

    Macron concludes his plea: “It is for you to decide whether Europe and the values of progress that it embodies

    The Left stating its values to be those of everyone merely reduces trust further.

    Europe’s so called progress is an observable nightmare.

    Macron at least encourages us to think big for Europe, but we ought to go further.

    What value is any of that?

    My sum stylistic reaction to this article is that it represents a much smarter and refined rhetoric of Macron and globalism. Macron should fire his speech and quip writer, today, and hire this author. I state that unironically.

    My sum political reaction to this article is that it pushes Europeanism, and thus a form of globalism, while making promises to the nationalists that cannot be kept, will not be kept, and that the nationalists should never trust; given both recent and 20th century history and given the observed social and cultural agendas of those in power in Brussels.

  66. Whitewolf says:

    Europe needs more Orbans not Macrons. There’s a reason you don’t have people protesting every weekend for months in Hungary. Orban rejected globalism with more than words. He refused to diversify the Hungarian population. He refused the vision of a Europe without Europeans. That’s why the msm mostly ignores him except to suggest he’s a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews for suggesting Hungarians should have more children instead of being replaced by foreigners from Africa and the Middle East.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  67. Anon[935] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous coward

    The Jewish concept of God is held by the Jewish people to be a type of thought form or ethno-form, in that he is both a reflection of his people in Heaven and that his people are a reflection of him on Earth.

    This is people specific, and so each God has his people and each people their God.

    In line with the Jewish monotheistic supremacism that does not recognize the validity of other Gods and thus not of other people, Jews eventually changed any reference to the Gods of other peoples to “Angels” that protect other peoples but are ultimately manifestations of their god

    Monotheism is the concept that by defeating a people, the Jews defeat their God (Angel) in Heaven, and by defeating their God in Heaven the Jews weaken his corresponding people on Earth. Leaving One God, and One People: the Jews. This is reflected in the Jewish concepts of the “War in Heaven” and “As above, so below”. It is also reflected in their eschatology that holds that all other peoples will eventually be genocided except for the Jews.

    So, if you are referencing the Semitic concept of God then you are only referencing the Jewish God. He doesn’t like you. He doesn’t even consider you to be human. He wants you genocided. According to the Jewish texts.

    If you are referencing the other poster’s ethnic-racial God, then I would offer that this may not be your God.

    However, if you are reminding him that his God exists and is watching him then I get your point. Though, the phrasing leaves out a lot of theological context.

    And, yes, Christianity and Islam are Jewish cults, reference the Jewish god, and the identical essential goals of those religions are the goals of the Jews. Which is revealed when one compares what the Jewish, Christian, and Islamic texts say about their respective end-times. Explaining what they say and in what other respects Christianity and Islam are subcults in service to Judaism is out of the scope of this post.

  68. Anonymous[342] • Disclaimer says:
    @Whitewolf

    europe need more citizens that take care of their own future instead of delegating the work to the politicians .

  69. Anon[300] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    As for channeling the alt-Right, Macron is actually channeling Andrew Doyle, AKA Titania McGrat:

    “For too long, bigots have hidden behind the outdated principle of ‘free speech’ in order to justify expressing the wrong opinions. Free speech is a dangerous Western ideology invented by fascists to spread hate. A kind of hate spatula, if you will.”

    History clearly describes free speech as an invention of Revolutionary Leftists.

    The implication is that they used it to undermine the control of Monarchies and each reasonably downstream government type to further deconstruct it.

    That the Far Left is now describing Free Speech as distasteful a tool of the Right merely illustrates that the Left feels that they have consolidated enough power and control that they do not wish to see similarly undermined.

    A fact that puts the moral legitimacy of the prior revolutions into deep question.

    The legal legitimacy of the revolutions was never in question. They were always illegal.

  70. Anon[300] • Disclaimer says:
    @Threestars

    You need to read Dorocher’s article for the synthesis, as the “boomers” were correctly doing. Not the massaging setup.

  71. Anon[300] • Disclaimer says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    Europe’s meaningful international genetic cluster was more meaningful before prior invasions (Spain) and immigrant importations (France).

    Even before then, there was enough genetic cluster difference difference to maintain meaningful tribal borders to varying degrees of success before the Thirty Years War eventually solidified them.

    In sum, Sweden may not wish to mix with even Germany and they would have a valid claim to that preference.

  72. Anonymous[335] • Disclaimer says:

    Macron as a young globalist evidently has a rare passion and will in promoting his grand designs.

  73. @Miro23

    Thanks for the comment! Very interesting!

  74. @Wally

    It was English Zionist subversion always that took steps to prevent unification of Europe.
    Austro-Hungarian empire was good promising beginning to unite Slavic and Germanic people.
    The English and French conspiracy using stupid Polacks put end to it.
    But now there is a new beginning. I do hope that this time it will work out.

  75. notanon says:

    He claims to want a “zero carbon” European economy by 2050, which strikes me as laughable.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan

  76. The promotion and or financing of higher education for migrant girls, or girls in Africa or elsewhere in impoverished communities, will not decrease out-of-control birth rates as long as neoliberal politicians keep paying migrants (and many citizens) per kid produced via welfare programs and child tax credits.

    The bureaucrats and educators whose lofty educational programs, salaries and lucrative not-for-profits are financed by taxpayer money will be the biggest beneficiaries of this continued, unsuccessful birth-control method.

    The best thing about Macron is his pride in the French architecture and art, which is best-in-class in the world, really. That is the one thing the Yellow Vests got wrong; it was wrong to resent the money Macron spent to renovate historical French buildings. That is not frivolous spending, like the $10,000 haircuts of their former “socialist” leader. Macron’s lavish spending on pool construction for globalist elites to frolic in during the vacations that they call work is another matter.

    That phenomenon is widespread in the USA, too, mostly practiced by highly paid, above-firing, dual-earner parents and their children who are said to “study hard” when on globetrotting vacations. Even when people snag high-paying, family-friendly crony jobs, lengthy and frequent vacations, in addition to PTO, multiple pregnancy leaves and other excused time off, is not equivalent to hard work. It is the opposite of hard work, no matter how many kids you’ve offered up as an altruistic gesture to strengthen your nation’s economy and no matter how much you are paid due to being “the talent.”

    If you are truly “the talent,” you are needed at work, not in a posh pool at some international resort, where you fraternize with your fellow globalists. That is a vacation, just like the frequent family trips to Europe, described as educational by globetrotting American parents. Yes, Europe has wonderful historical sites galore, but school-year vacations are not equivalent to the grind of studying hard, not even if what sprang from your upscale loins has been labeled as “gifted.”

    Apples and trees are the way of the New Aristocracy, created by womb-privileged, above-firing feminists and their assortative mating, which concentrates the wealth from the few good-paying jobs under fewer roofs, halving the size of the middle class.

    Quality is not multiplying as fast as the dual earners’ Barbie princess mansions.

    It is not just the fact that so many single, educated adults in so-called white-privileged nations cannot even afford the dignity of an independent apartment anymore on earned-only income. With all of these highly educated dual earners at the top, concentrating the wealth in fewer households due to their talent, life expectancy is declining along with other signs of Third Worldish blight, like predatory lending businesses on every corner in formerly middle-class areas.

    If the highly paid dual-earner parents were really so gifted, advanced Western nations would not be losing their big, thriving middle classes. Western industries would be expansive, not withering into little, specialized enclaves, employing mostly foreign-national temps and very few citizens, but paying a few “gifted,” vacationing parents massive salaries for their majestic, innate, managerial gifts—gifts passed magically, not through connected-up cronyism, from globetrotting elite assortative-mate parents to the royal offspring in their DNA dynasty.

    Those globetrotting, absentee kids are above suspension despite all the lengthy vacations, unlike non-elite kids. The parents, likewise, are above firing despite mornings, afternoons, days and weeks of absenteeism, while ordinary, non-womb-productive underlings who meet the quotas every month and never miss a day of work are fired for 5 minutes of absenteeism.

    That is, umm, a decadent society with an entrenched aristocracy, not a society full of hardworking, rugged individualists, rewarded for hard work and production. Corporate cronies do constantly churn & burn hard workers who help to keep their bonus numbers high, but hard work does not pay for most outside of the crony circles, which often revolve around personal-life characteristics, like kids, not work.

    And no, the importing of lots of cheap, welfare-assisted, servile workers to reduce labor costs for the rich does not strengthen a nation’s economy. Nor are all (or even most) of the welfare-eligible ones hardworking. Unless they work under-the-table, welfare-consuming immigrants cannot work hard in America. They lose their eligibility for welfare if they go over the earned-income limits.

    The talented elites just cannot understand this simple arithmetic.

    Immigrants consume more welfare, so no, they are not hardworking.

    Neoliberal welfare programs are designed to require recipients to stay under the earned-income limits, which is convenient for cheapskate employers who cut labor costs by offering mostly low-wage, part-time jobs that keep single moms and immigrants welfare-eligible. No matter how the gifted elites spin it, that is how the neoliberal welfare system works, and the emphasis on working moms does not advance feminist educational ideals any more than it advances a broad middle class or a sustainable birth rate.

    Neoliberal welfare programs and progressive tax code checks that reward womb-productive sex are not an attempt to control birth rates, quite the opposite, as the demographic breakdown of the younger generations in the USA—the biggest generations in US history—aptly demonstrates.

    The biggest generations in US history (the Millennials and the Z Generation) were conceived during three decades of neoliberal welfare and progressive tax code policies, which punish the hard work of non-womb-productive individuals, while rewarding single mothers (and legal / illegal immigrants in single-breadwinner households) with government-financed monthly bills and a maximum child tax credit of $6,431 for working part time, while having kid after kid.

    The tax code also rewards higher-earning, dual-earner parents with two income streams, for sex and reproduction. Unless they have reproduced, the tax code does not reward the low-wage babysitters, NannyCams, low-wage daycare workers or elderly grandparents who do the work of raising the well-vacationed dual earners’ kids while they occupy two jobs in an economy bereft of decent-paying jobs.

    No group has taken advantage of this neoliberal system—designed to promote the feminist concept of working women in single-breadwinner households—more than immigrants in households with traditional, male breadwinners. They qualify, mathematically, for the same welfare. Just like the single-breadwinner moms, they get it by not working hard—by staying under the programs’ earned-income limits.

    This has created a labor market full of low-wage part-time jobs, catering to those with unearned income related to womb productivity, while crushing welfare-ineligible individuals who need for earned-only income to cover all household bills: the single, childless citizens; the older, single moms with kids over 18; the womb-less, single men who cannot pump out kids to make up the difference between low wages and living expenses; the non-custodial parents.

    Like international resort vacations for highly paid dual-earner parents, part-time work that qualifies you for welfare is not hard work, even if glorified immigrant parents or equally glorified single moms are the ones doing it.

    One of the welfare programs, the monthly cash assistance, makes special provisions for student moms, allowing them to count full-time college hours as their work requirement. In processing thousands of cases, I saw one mom availing herself of that provision.

    And it would not bolster the middle class if more welfare moms got degrees; one of the most underemployed groups in the USA is bachelor’s degree holders. That is because automation is reducing the need for workers, including the dual high earners. In addition to the backwatching cronyism of working parents, automatiom is why the highly paid parents, too, get away with taking so much time off from work (for kids, for kids……..and for mom-pampering).

    Corporations do have a “need” for endless streams of young temp workers from foreign countries.

    A bunch of nomadic and mostly foreign temp workers in tech fields, plus a few, aristocratic, crony-parent managers gathering in resort hotels for conferences, does not equal a healthy economy, even if you add in the many welfare-eligible, womb-productive, part-time-working immigrants and moms, plus the students, married moms and elderly people able to get by on part-time jobs since their parents, a spouse, a child support check or retirement checks cover their major household bills.

    • Replies: @Whitewolf
    , @EVROPA
  77. Anonymous [AKA "PatrickK"] says:

    Let Macron first try to control the France suburbs

  78. Whitewolf says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    The people flooding Europe with mass third world immigration know all the downsides including White Genocide that will result. They aren’t ignorant. They are evil.

  79. Geronimo says:
    @Libertardian

    “This guy, he doesn’t speak like a Gypsy.”

    Macron is a racist.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  80. MrB says:

    And I still have no idea what Macron is all about. He is very good at patronising people and those who he doesn’t patronise he simply pisses off.

  81. EVROPA says:
    @Endgame Napoleon

    Cooperativism is the ultimate redpill
    They would strenghten our links by common interest making a powerfull and cordinate agent

    We would gain independence from the financial crumbling system

    The money would be distributed more equaly letting cooperstivist have stable and large families

    The money would be inverted locally, not deslocalization

    Comunist failt because it was everything for the people without the people

    Capitalism has failed the same way centralizing all the money and power

    The only way to deal with this system is making every person responsable of their action while work by a common groupal interest

    You will have even more incentives since all the workers share the benefits of their business

    Take the basque country as example 12 % of the people work in a cooperative and 26% the pib of basques is due to the productivity of cooperatives

    And was born the same way , facing a demografical replacement by spaniards , and as a united minority they helped each other briging life to the biggest cooperatives of the world

    Why cant we do it? Why cant we help eath other breaking this corrupt system ?

    • Replies: @lost in nowhere
  82. @EVROPA

    The primary issue with cooperative formation from below is actually visible in any cooperativist atempt, which is that there grows an incentive within the organization to find other means of exploitation by hiring employees or contract workers who aren’t worker-owners, so that the worker-owners effectively become a new group of shareholders. Better than the current arrangement, but with its own contradictions in the anarchic market system giving rise to this kind of behavior. There can increasingly be an incentive not to dilute currently existing shares of profits with new worker-owners.

    This can be avoided by favorable legislation which incentives the expansion of cooperatives, offers employees buyout options with state loans, or mandates cooperative ownership. Otherwise there will be an incentive to exploit, and to exclude, and so cooperatives can end up being reactionary special-interests. I like cooperatives, and I think the left should try to own their successes, but they also need to be oriented towards ideological, political goals beyond maximizing their own share value. This includes the above, the cooperatives need to be ideologically bound to expanding cooperative businesses in the economy. They don’t necessarily have a built-in incentive to do that, just to defend their own enterprise like any other business, so I think it has to be a culture that is associated with them, they basically need to be “infiltrated” or have their formation by driven by leftists in order to build leftist culture in the burgeoning institutions from the beginning.

  83. EVROPA says:
    @Thulean Friend

    I think he really is secretly based looking how he interacted the last week in the ziocongress where two zionist overlord raised his hand like a puppet in front of the french elite while macron gaze full of a mix of incredulity and a deep dignity remain convative in silentfull manner.
    His soul is not completely lost

  84. @Geronimo

    ‘“This guy, he doesn’t speak like a Gypsy.”

    Macron is a racist.’

    Perhaps. However, that really isn’t enough.

  85. French business.

    But that is a great photo — just great.

  86. Macron’s a repulsive toad. Ugh.

  87. Johan says:

    “He has also pointed out that journalists, as pack animals, are too stupid to understand his “complex thoughts.” Therefore, he concludes sensibly enough, he is avoiding interviews with them.”

    The Zionist puppet is a relief in this case (even better when he would shut up altogether of course). In a democracy politicians are bound to start talking in terms of infantile slogans (that is, if they keep to the collective scripts, if they start improvising they run the risk to start talking random bullshit). Politicians in a democracy with universal suffrage are on average mostly a walking offense to the intellect, and so is Macron.
    I don’t know why the French tolerate this slick looking suit wearing preacher who, for those who are paying him, regularly does the obliged job of moral whipping and finger pointing as a maintenance of the guilt complex of the French people in relation to their colonial and WWII past. Poor French, how long has it been since they have run their country themselves?

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Guillaume Durocher Comments via RSS