[The Sabbaticus]

In France, Macron is the Far Right, not Le Pen

By Tarek Fatah, Author & Columnist, Canada

As a result of the first round of elections in France, the country has a choice between two contrasting characters. On one side is Marine Le Pen, an anti-Islamist advocate of French sovereignty, who supports French working class rights. She faces the front runner, former investment banker Emmanuel Macron, economic minister in President Francois Hollande’s government. A year ago, few would have predicted this outcome. The once mighty Francois Mitterrand socialists were reduced to also-ran status, with a mere 7% of popular support. The centre-right conservatives of Jacques Chirac and Nicholas Sarkozy, did not even make it to the final round of elections May 7.

My 45 years as a Marxist do not help me understand why the “nouveau left” is digging its own grave, while destroying a century of fighting for the working class. Le Pen, who talks constantly about the rights of French workers, is labelled “far right” while her rival, Macron, a former investment banker, has been endorsed by the French left.Macron has jumped on to the Merkel, Trudeau, Clinton bandwagon of guilt-ridden white politicians, who have swallowed Islamist victimhood propaganda without hesitation.
He claimed French security policy has unfairly targeted French Muslims.

At an October, 2016 rally, Macron rejected Hollande’s assertion: “France has a problem with Islam.” Incredibly, Macron insisted Islamic State isn’t Islamic: “What poses a problem is not Islam, but certain behaviours that are said to be religious and then imposed on persons who practice that religion.” By contrast, Le Pen has echoed what we on the left who have escaped Islamist tyranny say in battling jihadis.

As she put it Feb. 5: “In terms of terrorism, we do not intend to ask the French to get used to living with this horror. We will eradicate it here and abroad.” After the April 20 jihadist attack in Paris, Le Pen reiterated: “We must tackle the root of the evil. It is Islamist fundamentalism, the ideology that their terrorists are harnessing.”

Many of my comrades on the left have died in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran, Indonesia and Turkey for standing up to Islamofascists. And yet today, former investment bankers and drama teachers have the audacity to tell us they’re the new left and we, who risk our lives in the crosshairs of ISIS, are the “far right”. On the day after a French police officer was shot dead by an Islamic terrorist in Paris, France’s Fareed Smahi, agony written all over his face, approached the city’s “left-wing” mayor, who shrugged him off with a fake Clintonesque smile. Smahi told her: “Madam Mayor … I am Fareed. I accuse all the governments. … It’s the government that is responsible. It’s your government that is responsible … criminals, criminals,” he yelled as police intervened.

“We are French or we are not,” he asked. “We became a nation of double nationals. There is no more French. There is nothing any more. Look at all those females who walk all veiled in front of the prefect. But where are we going? Where are we going? What education am I supposed to give to my son?

“Lets abolish dual nationality, for God’s sake! I am calling on the government. … Let’s repeal dual nationality! One cannot be Algerian-French, Moroccan French … a French-whatever.” No doubt Smahi’s heartfelt plea will end up just as mine have, a voice in the wilderness. As my French grandmother would have said, “Qui vivra verra” (“time will tell”).

New Delhi Times

This hateful bigot must be put on trial for his racist xenophobia!

[Beren]

Sure, Macron is a right-wing liberal bankster, a former member of Hollande's government representing the establishment, whereas Le Pen is a nationalist on the side of the working class (socialist) and the people (populist), a nationalist socialist populist so to speak. That's also a way to interpret the elections indeed.

[Potemkin]

"I know that after my death a pile of rubbish will be heaped on my grave, but the wind of History will sooner or later sweep it away without mercy." - Joseph Stalin

[Lexington]

Seriously: you guys got Donald Trump elected here but you can't stop whinging. I'm enjoying the salt though.

If Macron is "far right" you need to see an optician.

[Political Interest]

Le Pen is not even far right, she is just hard centre right.

For some reason we all forgot exactly what fascism was some twenty years after the war and started calling normal conservative politicians fascists. People even like to call Trump a fascist.

Its almost as if we found fascism so shocking that we cannot identify it for what it really is, so much so thay anything even marginally right wing is the new Hitler.

[Beren]

so much so thay anything even marginally right wing is the new Hitler.

Hitler wasn't even right according to some, like Le Pen is not really right too. Roosevelt and Churchill were right, whereas Hitler (National Socialist) and Stalin (Soviet Socialist) were left. Liberals are the right and Le Pen is not supposed to be liberal, so she's left too actually.

[Rapperson]

Why would anybody be interested in a Marxist's opinion of who is and who isn't far right?

[Zagadka]

The same reason we care about people on the right have opinions on who isn't far left?

[Rapperson]

The same reason we care about people on the right have opinions on who isn't far left?

Really.

Marxists are a lunatic fringe. Self-describing as a Marxist is akin to saying "I'm an asshole" or "I'm a nazi". You are equating that with pretty much 50% of the electorate.

[Zagadka]

No, I agree with you, especially on cultural Marxism. I was just noting that having unrealistic views on who is on other ideologies is something everyone does.

[quetzalcoatl]

Really.

Marxists are a lunatic fringe. Self-describing as a Marxist is akin to saying "I'm an asshole" or "I'm a nazi". You are equating that with pretty much 50% of the electorate.

A fringe, yes, but lunatic? Pretty much anybody that believes facts are not subjective and that we have arrived where we are as a part of a historical process is, by a process of elimination, a Marxist in everything but name.

What you are, in effect, saying is that public at large reside in various shared fantasy worlds and conduct their lives as if they were real. Marxism is more than just invoking a name - it is a way of looking at the world.

[Rapperson]

A fringe, yes, but lunatic? Pretty much anybody that believes facts are not subjective and that we have arrived where we are as a part of a historical process is, by a process of elimination, a Marxist in everything but name.

What you are, in effect, saying is that public at large reside in various shared fantasy worlds and conduct their lives as if they were real. Marxism is more than just invoking a name - it is a way of looking at the world.

That is a rubbish definition of Marxism. It's like saying, if I prefer wine to water then I'm a Christian.

A Marxist is someone who wants a dictatorship and state control of means of production. And yes, given what we know that is lunacy. A Marxist today is either a lunatic or young and ignorant.

[quetzalcoatl]

That is a rubbish definition of Marxism. It's like saying, if I prefer wine to water then I'm a Christian.

A Marxist is someone who wants a dictatorship and state control of means of production. And yes, given what we know that is lunacy. A Marxist today is either a lunatic or young and ignorant.

Some Marxists want a dictatorship. Many do not. Many are unalterably opposed to the the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat. This concept was intended to be a temporary (intermediate) step between capitalism and communism.

I am opposed to DofP - not because I am a democrat, but because it doesn't work. Dictatorships are fated to be captured by narrow interests, human nature being what it is. Marx was wrong about this (and a number of other matters). He was right about the general outlines of his critique of capitalism.

Is it lunacy to support the current version of capitalism, which imposes a soft dictatorship of corporate oligarchy? I assert it is. The system, while marginally less unstable than other systems, has consistently degraded over time, eventually subjecting its population to intolerable pressures.

The fact is that nobody, and I mean nobody, has successfully implemented a stable economic system that doesn't radically degrade over time.

[Beren]

Rapperson is actually right in the sense that the Marxist club is dominated by people worshipping the Bolsheviks and considering themselves Bolsheviks, and they don't really consider anyone else a true Marxist or even a leftist. They consider them heretics or right-wingers.

[Rapperson]

Some Marxists want a dictatorship. Many do not. Many are unalterably opposed to the the concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

They may say they don't want a dictatorship, but I am quite sure most of them would be happy enough to accept that situation. Anyway, they are deluding themselves. Nobody will ever get the population to support a system that brings long term stagnation and poverty, so it can only exist under a dictatorship.

Winston Churchill said that democracy is the worst form of government in the world - except all the others.

I say capitalism is the worst economic system in the world - except all the others.

Many have tried to develop a viable alternative. All have failed. Marxism, fascism, Japanese corporate feudalism, all these systems have fallen short compared to orthodox capitalism.

[quetzalcoatl]

they are deluding themselves. Nobody will ever get the population to support a system that brings long term stagnation and poverty, so it can only exist under a dictatorship.

People are deluding themselves on a remarkably wide scale. They are already supporting a system that brings long term stagnation and poverty. Why in hell do you think there is such unrest in Western societies? Yes, capitalism in the past has adapted fast enough to survive, but recent evidence suggest it has become ossified and can no longer adapt.

I say capitalism is the worst economic system in the world - except all the others.

In terms of viability, this is true. But wherein does the viability of capitalism reside? Historically, it has survived because of its viral mutability and ability to adapt to external challenges.

...all these systems have fallen short compared to orthodox capitalism.

Your use of the term "orthodox" is a significant tell. Capitalism is failing now because of orthodoxy. It is failing to adapt, and no longer responds to needs of vast segments of the population.

[Rapperson]

@quetzalcoatl

Name a basic need of the population that capitalism fails to fulfil.

[quetzalcoatl]

@quetzalcoatl

Name a basic need of the population that capitalism fails to fulfil.

I have no intention of becoming involved in some shitty libertarian dispute over the role of government. Screw that. The only thing that matters is viability, and capitalism is undergoing severe stress and refusing to adapt.

People are angry. They are approaching the fighting mad stage. What capitalism needs to survive is to abandon the entire philosophical superstructure that was appended by Mises, Hayek, Friedman, et al as a kind of post hoc justification. Just do whatever is necessary to save the system.

In real terms, this isn't going to happen. Your enemy isn't the left, it's the Freedom Caucus.

[Rapperson]

I have no intention of becoming involved in some shitty libertarian dispute over the role of government. Screw that. The only thing that matters is viability, and capitalism is undergoing severe stress and refusing to adapt.

People are angry. They are approaching the fighting mad stage. What capitalism needs to survive is to abandon the entire philosophical superstructure that was appended by Mises, Hayek, Friedman, et al as a kind of post hoc justification. Just do whatever is necessary to save the system.

In real terms, this isn't going to happen. Your enemy isn't the left, it's the Freedom Caucus.

Ah the old story. A marxist never gives you specifics, just some vague generalities that are impossible to debate. That's a way of seeming intelligent I suppose. But try it on somebody that doesn't know any better, like a schoolgirl.

[quetzalcoatl]

Ah the old story. A marxist never gives you specifics, just some vague generalities that are impossible to debate. That's a way of seeming intelligent I suppose. But try it on somebody that doesn't know any better, like a schoolgirl.

Damn, you got me. You are of course right. Capitalism is very healthy indeed, and in no danger at all. Please keep on doing everything you've been doing.