WHAT IS "THE GREAT REPLACEMENT"?

25 June 2022

You see in France that Eric Zemmour made a great start in the Presidential election and got 18% and then dropped down through the floor through 7 to 4% in the second round and failed to win a single seat in the legislative elections.

He made many mistakes in his campaign, but the mainstream media are trying to get him to apologise for his saying that the greatest issue facing France is an identity issue and is not a cost of living issue.

His party is called Reconquest and his issue is called The Great Replacement. What is it about?

It is not some conspiracy theory where there are plotters who are moving in their people from south of the Mediterranean and the Sahel to take our places in France. No.

It is an observation. An observation that there are more and more women in the streets wearing the hijab and men dressed in jelabas. That if you look at the Register of births marriages and deaths, you see that those dying are called Pierre and Lucette and those being born are called Mohammed and Fatihah. That the average number of births to Muslim families is greater than to classic French families.

There's also a regret or sadness at the cultural loss that can be epitomised in the replacement of boeuf bourguignon by couscous.

And then there's that disgraceful story of the Stade de France where the English got blamed for Arab scum misbehaviour. They live off welfare and get poor results at school and in the workforce. They threaten our security. We are heading for civil war.

This is more than simple political manipulation: it indicates that politicians are afraid of reality. That's a very good point.

So Eric zemmour is projecting these trends into a future 5 or 10 years away and that's what the great replacement is about.

But why didn't the French share his opinion? The answer is that the short-term drove out the long-term in the shape of a) the war in Ukraine (prior to the Invasion, Zemmour was sympathetic to Putin's arguments and he also did not think it right that France take in refugees); and b) the cost of living crisis (that resulted from the war as well as from covid). 

And that seems like a very good point to me, and this is the problem with democracy. You have the technocrats - efficient, fair, emotionless - who assure continuity and maturity of direction from one electoral term to the next. Then you have the politicians who are prisoners really of increasingly diverse groupuscules of public opinion and powerless against global forces for change.  And finally, you have a public who can only think of their short-term troubles. But politicians overwhelmed by powerful global and domestic forces are powerless to represent them, they system loses credibility, winning your case becomes more important than preserving the system by respecting the majority.

That is how civilisations collapse - they crumble from the inside out.

Read More

WHAT'S WRONG WITH MACRON?

12 March 2022

Macron is the only politician keeping in touch with Putin. Good for Macron.

But otherwise, Macron is one of those hussard rowdy types. He needs to be a bit less flamboyant and declarative, he needs to listen and concentrate more, be less concerned by public opnion and focus more on policy, make attainable objectives instead of massive shattering unreachable goals esp given the coffers are empty, he needs to recognise that France is a middle-ranking power and he isn't some emperor-in-waiting, get away from the illusion of action and into real actions for the medium term for the european powers that be.

He really is foolish to crticise the UK the way he does and drive us further from common European interests.

He doesn't seem to recognise France's role or what will make France great again, which is more about listening and mediating and waiting with patience for results. He should help Germany find back its confidence so it can express itself on matters of foreign policy and this will help Germany loosen its tight purse strings, to facilitate a Europe that can take care of itself, promote peace in the world, and not need America or NATO who are remarkably aggressive and have goals quite unrelated to Europe's, with values quite the opposite of the values learnt in Europe after 400 years of war.             

Read More

IS MELENCHON RIGHT?

Melenchon is a utpoianist who believes man if perfectable. 

I know that man is flawed and only a functioning state with an operational legal system keeps man in place. (Religion can perform the same function.)

Melenchon thinks that the interests of the group must predominate over the freedom of the individual. And these interests are decided by the State. 

I think that direction is not given top-down from some autocracy, but rises bottom-up from the summation of the wishes of the people.

There should only be one party rule because competing interests leads to anarchy.

No! Let those who wish to represent the people put forward their policies for our consideration. The government has no interests other than those of the people.

Melenchon believes that private ownership is "expropriation". He thinks the state should own everything on behalf of the people, and decide how the assets of the country are best used.

I think maximum happiness and efficiency comes from private ownership.

Melenchon thinks that workers are "alienated" from the production process because they only see one little bit of it and do not share equally in the benefits.

Melenchon see society as composed of "classes".

I can see this is useful for a company's marketing and pricing, but society is composed of individuals and families living in nations. Workers do not identify with workers in other countries, individuals identify with those of the same or similar culture, language, credo, values, cuisine, clothes ... their neighbours preferred.

Read More