President Macron: 'There is no such thing as French culture'

These riots are regime-endorsed.

President Macron at home with his favourite constituents.

The riots in France, which seem to be fizzling out, are not revolutionary. As with the George Floyd ‘summer of love’, the violence is regime-endorsed and thus will eventually be localized and contained, if they are not already so.

It is no accident that the French protests were sparked by a story similar to those that have inspired various BLM protests. Here is the mother of the Algerian ‘youth’ killed by police, at the initial march in Nanterres, near Paris.

There has been considerable damage and drama since.

Thousands of vehicles and buildings have been burnt and multiple police barracks attacked. 700 policemen have been injured.

Most notably, a Paris mayor had his home rammed by a vehicle, and then his family was attacked with fireworks. His wife is in hospital with a broken leg, sustained while shielding her children.

The French police unions have released an extraordinary statement:

Facing these savage hordes, asking for calm is no longer enough, it must be imposed!

Restoring the republican order and putting the apprehended beyond the capacity to harm should be the only political signals to give.

In the face of such exactions, the police family must stand together.

Our colleagues, like the majority of citizens, can no longer bear the tyranny of these violent minorities.

The time is not for union action, but for combat against these “pests”. Surrendering, capitulating, and pleasing them by laying down arms are not the solutions in light of the gravity of the situation.

All means must be put in place to restore the rule of law as quickly as possible.

Once restored, we already know that we will relive this mess that we have been enduring for decades…

Today the police are in combat because we are at war. Tomorrow we will be in resistance and the government will have to become aware of it.

The police understand the true nature of what is taking place in France, and indeed around the world.

Open borders and the indulgence of criminals form part of a specific governing formula - the formula Macron himself implied when he infamously stated that French culture does not exist.

French philosopher, Bertrand De Jouvenal, proposed that elites, ‘the high’, always maintain power by means of an alliance with ‘the low’.

Under the veneer of democracy, ‘the high’ promises to liberate ‘the low’ at the expense not of themselves, but of ‘the middle’.

It is ‘the middle’ who are needed to effect mass transfer of wealth (by inflation and scandalous levels of taxation) upon which liberal democracy is built. Thus ‘the middle’, who generally seek maintenance of their ways of life alongside an independence from the state, must be sacrificed, or brainwashed into supporting their own destruction.

These elites, ‘the high’, are not the old nobility or aristocrats. They are the stage managers of the abstraction that is ‘the people’ and ‘the will of the majority', the liberators who gave the world the French Revolution, its Committee for Public Safety and its subsequent great terror on all things Christian and traditional.

De Jouvenal wrote of the his nation’s Revolution: “The Power of the People was but a fiction in a regime which was for practical purposes a parliamentary sovereignty. But the fiction justified the blotting out of liberty on a scale never known before in Europe.”

The revolutionaries who now form the elite of Europe and the US legitimize themselves as representatives of the people. But the truth is that they decide who the people are and what the people want. And to maintain power, it serves to discard the independent middle from this formula. This independence and identity must be robbed in order to fund and buy off ‘the low’, who thus become the footsoldiers of the elite.

Why is it that the Conservatives in the UK, elected to restrict immigration, have presided over the largest expansion of immigration in British history?

How is it that anti-war Obama voters helped Obama and Biden rain down destruction in Syria, Libya, and now Ukraine?

The same phenomenon was at work in Sarkozy’s failure to deal with immigration despite being elected on the back of the 2005 French race-inflected riots.

Elites from all political parties and corporate giants have no interest in protecting ‘the middle’. They all happily shut down society during covid, effecting the greatest ever transfer of wealth from ‘the middle’ to government and corporate coffers. They will open borders to new client-citizens, even if it increases crime and hurts local wages.

The headline image above of Macron, that strange man who married his drama teacher after they met when he was 15 and she a 40-year-old married mother of three, perfectly explicates De Jouvenal’s theory of the ‘high-low’ alliance. See his smile as his ‘friends’ give viewers the middle finger.

Allow me to share three videos which explicate the same theme. The first is of a French transvestite cheering on the protestors. Of course, ‘sexual dissidents’ are another important faction in the ‘high-low’ alliance:

Watch this French woman plead with the police to leave those same rioters alone:

Here is an old video of the Hollywood actor, Richard Gere, where he promotes his work for the charity ‘Open Arms’, which facilitates the transfer of young men of fighting age into Europe:

Does Gere truly believe that these are genuine refugees, hoping to start businesses and productive lives in service to their adopted countries? Has he asked their neighbours in their home countries?

Trump was not wrong. It is not ‘the best’ the western nations are receiving when they open their borders, but rather swathes of people who will merely serve to swell the ranks of the under classes of the first world, provide employment for the government and NGO workers who facilitate this, and thus boost the ‘high-low’ alliance of western elites.

This same ‘alliance-building’ is at work when Biden or Trudeau paint ‘white supremacy’ as the gravest threat to their nations. Their own native ‘middle’ are not part of the alliance, therefore they are the gravest threat to their regimes.

This is why a refugee can set fire to a cathedral in France, but then be released so as to murder a Catholic priest:

The story above is particularly illuminating.

Why did the Rwandan have the opportunity to kill the priest? Yes, because he was not in prison or deported, but also because the priest himself had been housing the man!

Why on earth would the priest do that?

Christianity itself has been perverted and weaponized in this alliance of ‘high-low’. Empathy has been ripped up from truth and common sense. I recall here the German philosopher, Carl Schmitt, and his thoughts on the political extrapolations of the Christian edict to ‘love your enemy’:

The enemy is hostis, not inimicus in the broader sense; πολέμιος, not ἐχθρός. As German and other languages do not distinguish between the private and political enemy, many misconceptions and falsifications are possible. The often quoted “Love your enemies” (Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:27) reads “diligite inimicos vestros,” ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν, and not diligite hostes vestros. No mention is made of the political enemy. Never in the thousand-year struggle between Christians and Moslems did it occur to a Christian to surrender rather than defend Europe out of love toward the Saracens or Turks. The enemy in the political sense need not be hated personally, and in the private sphere only does it make sense to love one’s enemy, i.e., one’s adversary. The Bible quotation touches the political antithesis even less than it intends to dissolve, for example, the antithesis of good and evil or beautiful and ugly. It certainly does not mean that one should love and support the enemies of one’s own people.

But many Christians nowadays equate ‘love’ with tolerance of all manner of evil. When churches fly the Pride flag they are showing an utter break with the orthodox Christian understanding of love - which is to work for the good of the other according to the Christian standard of goodness, and not the affirmation of the other in accordance with the standards of modern liberal nihilism.

Why do churches do this? Not out of any conviction, but because they want in on the ruling alliance between ‘high’ and ‘low’. The faith is to be subsumed, is to be deliberately emptied. (After all, was the Christian faith not at the heart of all the greatest evils committed by the white man?)

This is why nobody cares at all why Notre Dame in Paris was mysteriously set on fire, least of all church authorities.

Certainly Michelle Obama does not care…

The ‘high-low’ alliance is also why there is no rioting when atrocities are committed by immigrants. The media and the state (I repeat myself) have no interest in such events because outcry over them would not serve their interests. The life of an Algerian criminal, like George Floyd, is worth more to the alliance than the lives of British, French, or Austrian girls:

If the police unions in France are beginning to see the truth of what is going on, then many more of the ranks of ‘the middle’ are surely waking up too.