Skip to comments.Far-Right National Front Wins EU Vote in France: exit polls
Posted on 05/25/2014 11:36:22 AM PDT by docbnj
click here to read article
The LePenites actually are Nazis though. Socialists but against Muslim immigration and for law and order so they are called part of the “right”.
They were Racist Commies.
More akin to the. BNP which barely registered in this UK election
Thanks so much for keeping up with the elections, and for the ping!
We do live in interesting times, indeed.
I think they are pro handouts needy French people. Obviously that is difficult to determine.
Whereas Paul Ryan and Jack Kemp type candidates are for crony business, massive immigration and handouts for illegal aliens.
National Front is not a neonazi poltical party but heres a list a few of the biggest ones
Neonazi parties in europe(have to be explicitly anti semitic and flirting with skinheads to qualify as such)
Jokkib in Hungary
Svoboda in Ukraine
Ataka in Bulgeria
npd in germany
Golden dawn in greence
Thanks for the ping/post. Vive la France! DEPOPULATE socialists from the body politic.
“A more rational spectrum would put those in favor of authoritarian state control on one end (putting Communists, Nazis, and fans of dictatorship in general on the same end), and those wanting minimal government on the other end.”
That would definitely make more sense. The left and right don’t make a bit of sense when Communism and National Socialism are both big Government takeovers.
You are technically correct but it would be more fitting to start identifying the European “far right” groups as Nationalist Socialists or fascists instead of Nazi. Just the term Nazi has been somehow related to our Conservatism by the Progressives. But, Nazi was the National Socialists while the current ruling group in France is Communist Socialists. Then somewhere out there are the Marxist Socialists. All of them are “left” by our standards.
To the news media, anything nationalist = “far right.” Especially in Europe. The FN is a nationalist party but they are nowhere close to what we would consider in America as “far right” or even moderately conservative. It’s always good to see Socialists get a knee in the metaphorical goolies, but the FN is no Tea Party by a long shot.
Also remember that these are for the EU Parliament. For whatever reason these elections seem to skew a lot further toward the nationalist parties than the respective countries’ actual governmental elections...witness the fact, for example, that the BNP could get a couple seats in the EU Parliament a few years ago but couldn’t translate that into any significant wins in the UK at any level.
Pretty broad statement.
Farage (UKIP Leader) knows NF are Fascists. Too bad Wilders in Netherlands didn’t come to the same conclusion.
Farage said no to the NF because he thinks they are Anti-Semites
“Its code for Nazi which they cant say outright because it would be laughed at.”
Well in this case I can’t help if that label might be an accurate description of the french “National Front” which is indeed socialist in policy just like a real NAZI party.
The BNP lost votes, the small Christian Party lost some votes. I suspect they all went to UKIP.
Do you know any FN people?
Have you gone to France and talked to them about their "policies"?
I can introduce you to Black members of the FN.
The focus is on French nationality, French culture, and French industry.
This includes some of the former colonies - now Overseas Departments like Martinique, Guadeloupe and French Guyane. And Senegal to a degree, although the mass influx of Senegalese the FN would definitely oppose. But even Dumas was part Senegalese.
The FN has a rational way of regarding their history: leave it as is, but don't do any more of that. For example, the concept of an Algerian Justice minister for France is like putting an Imam in charge of a Catholic cathedral. To put it mildly, they opposed that.
And as for "national socialism", if they advocate government favoritism for their private industries, how is that different from Lockheed, Boeing, and the hundreds of billions of dollars lavished on Citigroup, AGI, and all the other Wall Street criminals?
You're labeling of them is exactly what I'm talking about. You sling smear labels based on shallow analogies.
The FN is what we don’t want to happen to conservatism. The UKIP is. The FN is better than the marxists running the show now and I’m glad they won but it’s simply lowering the dosage of a poison.
That's a "rational" spectrum in the US because the most pressing political debate is between large vs. small government. In Europe, statism is more or less a given, so the relevant political spectrum is framed in terms of issues like pro vs. anti-EU, pro vs. anti immigration, etc. From their perspective, you could equally well construct a political spectrum with multiculturalism/internationalism at one (Left) end of the spectrum and cultural conservatism/nationalism (Right) at the other.
In the United States, the political Left and Right are defined as being on the statist vs. libertarian spectrum, but that simply isn't true in the rest of the world nor has it been true historically. When the statist Bolsheviks overthrew the statist Monarchists in Russia, only a fool would call the Monarchists "left wing" or "socialists" because they weren't US-style libertarians.
Similarly, the political spectrum in France and most of the rest of Europe isn't framed in terms of large vs. small government. It's framed in terms of whether they want EU identity or national identity. It's framed in terms of people who want an ethno-state and culture vs. those who want to flood the country with Third World immigrants. Condemning nationalist movements in Europe on the grounds that they aren't economic libertarians means implicit support for the alternative: multiculturalism and internationalism, because that's the only alternative.
“NAZI is not on the right at all, they were competitors for the same supporters as the commies”
I simply referred to how a circular ideological concept works. It’s a circle. There is not Right, nor a Left. It’s just a concept.
“This does not come from reason, but from the simple fact that the Communists labeled anybody who opposed them as “far right”. Thus Nazis and Jeffersonians are both “far right”.”
If you take the circular concept and put 2 random points on a circle then travel along its path in a direction to the right. Eventually you will hit both. It’s a circle.
That is not an “irrational” concept at all.
I agree with your “rational spectrum” just as much as the circular one interests me.
“Left” and “Right” are defined as the political forces of revolution vs. those of tradition and reaction. So what’s Left and what’s Right is time and place specific, and it’s absurd to assume that the political and cultural issues that define Left and Right in America today are somehow universal, applicable to all places and times. The defining issues of tradition vs. radicalism in Europe today aren’t small vs. big government.
Nazis and Communists are both Statists. Neither believes in small government.
Case in point: neither Czar Nicholas nor the Bolsheviks who overthrew him were small government libertarians. That doesn't stop most rational people from characterizing the Bolsheviks as Left-wing and the Czarists as right-wing in that context. Similarly, neither LePen's supporters nor the EUcrats who run France are US-style libertarians. That doesn't change the fact that the nationalist anti-EU, anti-third world immigration faction represents the French Right, while the EU-crats and multiculturalists represent the Left.
This chart stops at Socialism. Which is not 100% Government control. That is more likely, Communism, or just - Statism.
The order should also maybe be: Progressives - Liberals - Conservatives
And that's the key point. All European governments engage in state support or control of industry; the question is the degree.
The babble about "national socialism" being akin to Communism and therefore different from some pure vision of free market / private property regime in Europe exists only in the minds of people who don't live there. Even England has state subsidies for the few remaining English industries, and that's about the only place where something resembling the American model exists (which of course is not surprising...).
The FN is the expression of French chauvinism if you want to sling smear labels.
But if opposing the takeover of Europe by Muslim masses means being a smug Gallic chauvinist, by all means take the hit. Far better then your children ending up kneeling to Saracen overlords with scimitars.
Their ancestors handled the Soldiers of the Caliphate far more effectively at Tours. Time to do it again.
“Left and Right are defined as the political forces of revolution vs. those of tradition and reaction. So whats Left and whats Right is time and place specific, and its absurd to assume that the political and cultural issues that define Left and Right in America today are somehow universal, applicable to all places and times. The defining issues of tradition vs. radicalism in Europe today arent small vs. big government.”
I believe that this is already taken into context by anyone who is experienced.
LePen's supporters are the only viable entity who oppose subsuming the country to EU bureaucrats and a wholescale transformation into an Arab and African slum. To oppose them because they aren't Hayek-style free marketeers is absurd. American anti-Communists didn't have problems with the "statism" of anti-Communists like Chiang Kai Chek in Taiwan or Francisco Franco in Spain because they recognized that these were the only viable alternatives to Bolshevism and Maoism. Why is it so difficult to accept French or German Nationalism as the only viable alternatives to the EU and the Third World Colony model for Europe?
You said it better then me.
One comment...it may be too late.
Was in Paris for a couple of weeks last winter, and it’s far, far more Arab and African then just 20 years ago.
I don’t have the time to search it out but I believe that the number of births to non-Europeans in Ile de France (greater Paris) is now 55%; in a few decades Paris will be majority non-European.
Only violence will change that. They aren’t going to leave voluntarily.
I was there for the big riots back in 2005; the car burnings were simply amplified over the usual pummeling that the Banlieu gangs subject the French to. No one had told them they had to leave, they were just mad that they couldn’t get more freebies. So they thought they’d take the game to a new level.
The FN will be a force to reckon with for the invaders. But when push comes to shove, it remains to be seen if the rest of France can stomach the shoving.
And that's the key point. All European governments engage in state support or control of industry; the question is the degree.
Exactly. Just like in this nation. Who stands up for us? The GOP? Not hardly. On that matter far too many on the so called right are in bed with the left. Are we going to continue to allow massive unchecked anti white immigration and the destruction of our culture is what it ultimately boils down to. IMO almost all other questions are moot til that is settled.
“But when push comes to shove, it remains to be seen if the rest of France can stomach the shoving.”
I hope it can otherwise the gypsies trying to pick pockets in the square in front of Notre Dame or the Africans accosting people on the way to Sacre-Coeur will be the least of their problems.
A little story.
A friend of mine is ex-French Army Special Forces (yeah, they have them!) and he had a hilarious story: coming back from the Middle East a few years back he was greeted by one of the first African Police National members in the arrival corridor at CDG. The PN guy said, “Welcome to France!”, and he said, “Same to you!”
As opposed to an international socialist. Comintern, etc.
And it’s easy to be labelled far right these days - just point to how much better things were before change was forced, or hornswaggled, on western civilization over the last few decades. All it takes now is pointing out the errors continually made since then by the powers that be, even while they terminally argue for more of the same. Then you’re an extremist.
The Nazi Party of France isn’t on the right.
The best political spectrum isn’t right/left (an invention of the communists), but liberty v. slavery. It’s clearer.
We need to circulate this video again for a reminder:
If MLP doesn’t want to be considered neo-fascist or neo-Nazi, she should stop being the guest of honor and dancing at neo-nazi balls as she did last year in Vienna. She is also linked up every bro-fascist and skin head group in Europe, and has been for years.
Unfortunately for you, you are not in touch with the history and roots of the National Front, let alone with the people who run it.
I lived in Paris and the South of France for more than 12 years, went to school there, and visit friends and family regularly.
There is part of the French population, many former extreme leftists, who find the FN and their Soviet style totalitarianism appealing, others are outright anti-Semites and racist. Others look at the mess France is in now, ruled by Hollande and the Socialists, an incompetent bumbling group of elite, over privileged, over indulged children of the 60’s (BoBo soixante huitards) and how their cultural identity has been subsumed in the mega-bureaucracy of the EU, far away from their everyday lives. Add to that uncontrolled immigration, very high unemployment, high taxes, class warfare, and you have the poisonous brew in which movements like the FN prosper. We have seen it all before, and it never ends well.
Nobody in my milieu votes FN, almost all are on the Right. We all realize the FN offers no real solutions for reforming the French system, are virulently anti-American and anti-Capitalist.
Fortunately, they are a dying breed. The PS in France is on life support. How Hollande with a popularity rating of less than 15% can govern for the next three years is beyond me, and a huge problem.
MLP will make every attempt to define herself as the opponent of, and alternative to Hollande. Fortunately, Nicolas Sarkozy is waiting in the wings, prepared for this moment, riding high and a wave of support and popularity with huge popular support.
Right now Sarko is in Israel, meeting with their leaders, and attending his wife, Carla’s concerts, where he is cheered and applauded. He can pick up the phone, call any world leader, and have his call answered or returned immediately. We witnessed this ourselves at Carla Bruni’s concert at Town Hall in NY a month ago. It was like a huge campaign rally, and a very good concert as well. Sarko shook hands with everyone, took pictures with people, and stayed for half an hour talking to anyone who wanted to shake him hand. Open and accessible.
Thanks for the post. Interesting thread. Thanks to all posters.
Vive la France!
A pity you have no one to vote for then.
Like i said, the French may not have the stomach to watch as what needs to be done...is done.
But it may not matter. The birthrate and Christiane Taubira will finish them off far too quickly.
Perhaps you could enlighten the rest of us....will it be “France” in 30 years?
Even if they can’t wear the Burkha?
In the Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway the main opposition to the EU and immigration comes from parties who support smaller government.
I am American, and I vote here.i love France, but I am an American conservative.
I have known Nicolas Sarkozy for many, many years, since he was Mayor of Neuilly-sur-Seine, and am a longtime supporter. In my view he is the only one with the stature, experience, political savvy and correct world view to bring France out of the present situation. Mobocracy and the anti-American class warfare and anti-capitalism of the FN are abhorrent to me. They are the flip side of Socialism, and neither would ever get my support.
Like the guy said “I’m proud to be an American, where a at least I know I’m free”
These encompass socialism, communism, monarchies and other tyrannical forms of concentrated government.
It's the basis of the argument for conservatism, the true moderate ideology.
Without getting into the actual political platform, this is the most accurate comment I've seen so far.
At the time Hitler came to power, Socialism was on the rise in Europe. "Socialism" was incorporated into the party name, expressly to attract all the budding socialists.
But even Hitler said in 1930: "Our adopted term 'Socialist' has nothing to do with Marxist Socialism. Marxism is anti-property; true Socialism is not."
Nazi doctrine was both anti-capitalism and anti-communist. You probably wonder how that's possible, but the only way I know to explain it is: "you keep your private property, but must use it to perform your duty to the country".
Your straight-line political spectrum is absolutely correct.
The reason that it’s so hard in real life to see that straight line is related to what you say about anarchy, that “most activity described as being anarchist is actually intent on bringing about a more severe form of totalitarianism”.
In the real world there are few or no true proponents of pure anarchy and in history the only possible instances of true anarchy are temporary and local and the result of some incredible upheaval (natural disaster or war-related).
Because true anarchy is so rare as to be invisible, the anti-conservative, anti-capitalist antics of ultra-left bomb-throwers often get mis-characterized as anarchy, when in reality, as you point out, the perpetrators are actually fighting for a Supreme Totalitarianism.
Thank you - great commentary - cheers!
Absolutely! It's a highly slandered ideology savagely used by the left as a mechanism to bring about a more severe form of totalitarianism.
In perspective though, "leftist anarchists" are not truly anarchists, they are socialist terrorists trying to bring about a change in government through acts of reprehensible violence.
That’s nice, but you didn’t answer the question: Will it be France in 30 years if Arab/African immigration continues at its present rate, and their birthrate does not moderate, and they continue to get State benefits out of the pockets of Europeans?
Did Sarkozy change any of that?
I can show you massive public housing developments outside of Cayenne, along with expensive schools there as well. Paid for by EU and French Euros.
Who populates them? Haitians, Surinamese, Brazilians and of course people from French Guyane. The foreigners illegally immigrate and eventually get on the welfare lists by managing to not be deported for a few years at which point they claim residency. The local administration usually goes for that.
These were built under Sarkozy. It actually accelerated under his administration.
Do the citizens of France know that they are subsidizing tens of thousands in the Caribbean and South America?
And they all have one goal: eventually to be given the Metropolitan France immigration visa so they can move to Europe where the goodies are even better.
Somehow that works out for a lot of them. Did UMP and Sarkozy change that?
If not, now you know why people voted for the FN. Clearly UMP doesn’t have the will power to do anything other then symbolic moves.
Perhaps you are not concerned. Perhaps you think it will be France even though the French are gone: at least the buildings will remain, right?
Think it’s obvious I disagree with that concept.