|
The French Gilets Jaunes: Macron Must Resign!
December 2018
The grass-roots "Gilets Jaunes" (Yellow Vests) street demonstrations in France have been escalating steadily in both fervour and effect on major city thoroughfares and elsewhere in the French nation since the 17th of November, with no clear sign of stopping anytime soon, despite moves by the French government this week to defuse the situation.
 |
The notion that demonstrations of such magnitude and stamina could be motivated solely or even largely by strictly monetary concerns is simply not a credible one for discerning observers.
 |
| Above: the Gilets Jaunes on the Champs Elysee in Paris last month. |
Interestingly, though the protests have been consistently characterised by mainstream media outlets as a response to fuel taxes and high cost of living, the beginning of the popular uprising was preceded less than a week earlier by a speech from French President Emmanuel Macron at the WW1 armistice centennial in Paris, in which he was at some pains to make an altogether misplaced and clearly personal distinction between "nationalism" and "patriotism" for those who cared to remain awake.
Now it would appear that offers by the French government to postpone or scrap the implementation of new taxes on fuel have been met by cries of "too little too late" from conspicuously underwhelmed protesters. In fact, the notion that demonstrations of such magnitude and stamina could be motivated solely or even largely by strictly monetary concerns is simply not a credible one for discerning observers.
What is happening in France is obvious. There are of course a number of catalytic factors and we will not discuss the Faurisson effect here (some readers will understand the reference), but what it all boils down to is that the people have largely woken up to the fact that the Rothschild banker in the Elysee palace, Emmanuel Macron, does not represent their interests and never has. Nor is he ever likely to do so, for the simple reason that he is not really one of them. (He belongs to quite a different people, hook, line and sinker.) As a result many feel cheated and angry, and to some extent chagrined, recalling the unreservedly one-sided support that the Macron presidential election campaign received last year from a more or less doting mainstream media, not to mention the banks.
Only a few weeks before the election's first round in April 2017, Macron reported taking out a personal loan of 8 million euros for campaign purposes from a French bank he did not specify. This in fact represented almost half of his entire campaign expenditure, which is capped by law in France. Such loans effectively provide a means by which wealthy donors can anonymously and even profitably exceed legal limits on contributions by individuals; contributions which are otherwise heavily capped at 4,600 euros apiece.
The French state reimburses candidates for half of their campaign costs if they receive more than 5% of the vote. The size of campaign loans to candidates, and their undisclosed terms, can therefore be carefully chosen so as to ensure no ultimate expense to the candidate or the bank. In fact, the bank may even profit by what is effectively a state guaranteed loan. Macron's final campaign expenditure total, for instance, was reportedly 16.8 million euros, of which he is entitled to be reimbursed for 8.4 million, effectively leaving him with enough to pay back the capital of his loan plus an extra 5%. It is not clear who exactly was behind the granting of the loan to Macron, but readers may recall that no French bank could be found to support the campaign of his chief rival in the election.
|
The sheer scope and intensity of the French response in recent weeks has come as something of a surprise to many who, frankly, had given them up for dead after last year's election. Indeed, few anticipated the emergence therefrom of a movement that is now serving for many near and far as a beacon of effective people power in the war against soulless internationalism.
As for the much discussed fuel tax hike, it has served only as a catalyst for the manifestation of a far more general discontent and disillusionment among French people regarding the entire political system, including the mainstream media propaganda that (mis)informs it and the rank cronyism that drives it. (The phoney democracy in other words.) It is, in fact, a sentiment that they share with a steadily growing number of people in both Europe and further abroad, but the sheer scope and intensity of the French response in recent weeks has come as something of a surprise to many who, frankly, had given them up for dead after last year's election. Indeed, few anticipated the emergence therefrom of a movement that is now serving for many near and far as a beacon of effective people power in the war against soulless internationalism. Apparently Frenchmen have had quite enough of Macron's own special brand of "patriotism".
Even Macron's environmentalism is counterfeit and shallow.
 |
Real respect for the environment is rooted in love of the land. It cannot be reduced simply to a question of money and politics. Nor can clever engineering and planning alone solve our environmental problems. The true culture of a land and a people, that is to say, a nation, is not arbitrary like the disposable pseudo-culture of technology and technocrats. It is as intimately related and indigenous to the land as a tree or a mountain. (It takes spiritual maturity to perceive this.) Therefore nationalism, understood correctly, without superfluous implications of comparison to others, always goes hand in hand with a genuine respect for the environment, that is to say, with one that is not merely a posture or a decision. And any environmental policy that is not implemented in the context of authentic Christian nationhood is doomed to failure.
Consider. What if we were to venture out onto the streets of France ourselves to inquire of the protesters directly the reasons for their ire and frustrations? What would they tell us? What if they trusted us enough to speak frankly and from the heart? Would our impressions be consistent afterwards with those conveyed to us by the mainstream media, for instance? Or would they be different? What if we were careful to take the responses of a good sample of the protesters nation-wide, not confining our investigation to the major cities or to those who behaved in ways we found acceptable for our purpose or for the furtherance of our career, but randomly, without prejudice or sensationalism, and without being paid by anyone for our efforts? Would our conclusions be different at the end of the day to those based exclusively on remunerated media reports?
Clearly it is highly unlikely that the political clique that controls the mainstream media in the Anglosphere and most of Europe and whose power is based almost entirely on incentivised deception and conformity is going to report honestly and comprehensively on a significant show of strength or solidarity by the Resistance. Neither are they going to permit or give prominence for very long to anything too insightful or felicitous in the content and commentary sections of the Big Tech internet platforms they control. In short, if an opposition demonstration is too large and noisy to simply ignore or suppress (as it is in this case in France, but not perhaps further afield), then a concerted effort is made to misrepresent, downplay, trivialise, or demonise it, lest it serve to encourage others both domestically and abroad.
 |
| The King of Morocco lets nature take its course during Macron's misplaced speech at the WW1 armistice centennial in Paris. |
Meanwhile, on the ground, infiltration is often effected, false flag incidents arranged, or atrocities provoked, misassigned or spuriously generalised in media narratives in an effort to undermine or turn public opinion against the movement in question. Established organizations or groups may opportunistically and inauthentically try to co-opt it, often with the help of misleading media emphasis. (A good example of this is the current effort by the UK based "Tommy Robinson" brand, and its wealthy Jewish backers, to co-opt the grass roots "Brexit-means-Brexit" cause in Britain - see below*.) Alternatively or concurrently, bribes may be offered and force applied.
In some cases covert prostitutes are deployed for the purpose of identifying and neutralising effective
leadership elements within a movement, notwithstanding any reluctance on the part of the latter to be identified as such. Sexual liaisons formed in this way can then be extended to longer terms, if deemed necessary, for maximum effect.
Yet one can't help feeling that the Gilets Jaunes are of a more politically savvy and hardy bent, at least in some respects, than many of their populist counterparts in the Anglosphere. They seem particularly distinguishable from the latter by a notable absence of susceptibility and clinging to false leaders*. For example, recent attempts to foist "spokespeople" on them, for the purposes of negotiation, have so far failed to find their mark, making efforts by the mainstream media to mischaracterise or emasculate the movement more difficult; though of course the selection of interview subjects for news stories, drawn apparently from among the protesters, can be used to similar effect or intent. On the other hand, the apparent lack of leadership has not resulted in any notable lack of coherency or solidarity among the demonstrators, whose message is perhaps best characterised now by one resounding slogan in particular: Macron, démission! (Macron, resign!). And there are no signs yet of any significant backing down on that point.
|
It is highly unlikely that the political clique that controls the mainstream media in the Anglosphere and most of Europe and whose power is based almost entirely on incentivised deception and conformity is going to report honestly and comprehensively on a significant show of strength or solidarity by the Resistance.
Now it appears that Macron is trying to buy his way out of trouble by offering the people a reprieve on fuel tax hikes. Indeed, he and his cronies may offer even more in the days ahead if they feel sufficiently backed into a corner to do so. (Additional concessions are being discussed even as this article is being written.) It is in fact a very old story, after all. The choice between real change and small change will once again be offered to men and the response of the latter will speak more loudly about what they are made of than all the media speculation and spin in the world. But whatever the outcome in the short term, one thing seems certain for those paying attention: the French Gilets Jaunes are a sign of things to come.
*A Footnote to the Old Year
Nigel Farage, a prominent critic of the UK based "Tommy Robinson" brand mentioned above, is himself (like that which he criticises) just another tool of the crooked, hubris-ridden and non-representative UK establishment; an establishment that despises all forms of "tribalism" we hear, except presumably it's own narrowly familial and predominant one. The discernible Jewish influence, with its overtones of pharisaical hypocrisy and duplicity, comes by way of a long history of myopically convenient, nationally compromising and spiritually adulterous inter-marriage.
Australian readers may recall that the high profile Brexit campaigner and businessman, Farage, was sent Down Under in September for the purpose of outlining acceptable parameters of "alternative" thought for the colonials. He had been preceded only a little while earlier by a couple of clowns from Canada with similar motivation. Seems there is some concern in the corridors of power that Australians might be showing troubling signs of thinking for themselves. (Time for another China scare perhaps?)
Enter the more heavy duty Farage, a well trained pony of course, and just the man for the job with his carefully constructed ale-guzzling, cigar-toting image, an altogether cynical and irresponsible gimmick that nonetheless guarantees unquestioning support from large numbers of dedicated dupes both in Britain and the penal colonies.
Flashback to 2016, when immediately following the somewhat unexpected Brexit referendum result in June, Farage (in a blatant display of self-sabotage or lack of real commitment or both) dutifully abandoned his leadership role in the pro-Brexit "UK Independence Party" (UKIP), effectively reducing it from a formidable political force to a marginal one practically overnight. Of course the timing of Farage's step down less than a year prior to the crucial and fateful general election that followed is not without significance. Apparently the UKIP/Brexit movement had overstepped acceptable limits of success given its predominantly working class and indigenous support base. After all, no significant upset to the shallow Tory/Labour dichotomy could be permitted.
Fortunately for Brexit, however, grass roots support has endured quite independently of the fate of UKIP, which has since been more or less handed over to the Jewish backed "Tommy Robinson" sideshow. Farage, on the other hand, was offered a suitable, and no doubt generously remunerated job on UK radio talking sweet political nothings to his followers while the increasingly ridiculous marionette May (who has single-handedly brought dishonourable tenacity to a whole new level) does her best to sabotage Brexit.
Here's a thought for the New Year: let's all pray for an end to phoney democracy in 2019.