Le Pen

A “Right-Wing” Victory in France?

“The new age of the extreme right” read the headline in the left-leaning Nouvel Observateur magazine.

In yet another attempt to blur the lines of meaning the Left in The United States reports that “Right-Wing” Politician wins in France.

To understand what is going on requires one to understand that the Only Political Governing Theory existing in France is Socialist in Nature.  There is no Capitalism… There are No Candidates representing Free Markets or Freedom and Liberty of the Individual.  There is not a single Person representing Freedom To Choose.

When the French say “Right-Wing” they mean Fascist.  Fascism could be considered the right side of the Socialist Political Spectrum.  Communism would be on the left side of this straight line… all the other variants fall somewhere in between.  (For one commenter I recently had an exchange with, Theocracy is a distinction without a difference.  The Paradigm simply replaces the State with God.  The function, infrastructure, actions and results are otherwise identical.)

The reason I bring this up is Le Pen is being reported here in the States not as a Fascist, which would be appropriate, but rather as “Right Wing”.  You should be asking yourself “Why?”.  The purpose is obvious.  It is an attempt to equate “Right Wing” as used in US Political discussion as Fascist.  It is trying to label those on the Right who subscribe to Capitalism as Fascist…  It is trying to label anyone who has a Religion based world view as Fascist… It is trying to keep you confused…

It is effective as demonstrated by this comment from a post two days old in response from a post Snake put up.  The take-away is how the Leftist is using Le Pen to paint a picture and tries to separate her from Socialism in order to protect the Liberal World View he subscribes to:


March 26, 2014

Money, my friend. As a historian I can assure you it’s an old tactic that works very well. Create division and scapegoats and you might never have to have a real job ever again!
Check out how much money Le Pen made from xenophobia- donations like no other. Literally millions.
If one targets a group carefully enough that there are no mainstream shadows cast, it’s like winning the lottery.


  • Le Pen… She is a Socialist and did what Socialists do. While you’re right about balkanization being used to squeeze money from groups who perceive they are being persecuted, the tactic is purely leftist. Interesting example of Le Pen.


    • Pinkagendist

      March 26, 2014

      She’s not a socialist. You’re confusing two very different things, one is political affiliation and the other is political methodology.

      The real difference is authoritarianism versus individual liberties. Authoritarians can come from the left or right. General Franco, Mussolini & Pinochet were right, Mao, Stalin and Castro are left- all used the same authoritarian methodology to attain and maintain power.



      March 26, 2014

      Your Paradigm is only correct if the entire spectrum is Socialist in nature. Fascism is simply a flavor of Socialism… regardless of what your College Professor told you. All of the Socialist variants set the stage for Authoritarians to rise from them. And they do.
      The effort to use the Label “Right-Wing” is part of the intentional drive by the Left to confuse the public regarding what the different governing theories are.
      We see this when Franco, Mussolini, Pinochet and Hitler are positioned as “Right-Wing” and then the term is used to describe Capitalism. This example is not difficult to find… in fact, reread your comment.
      You see this all over Europe at this very typing. The Greeks use “Capitalism” to describe Fascism (A Socialist Variant) without hesitation. It serves to keep those who do not know ignorant in addition to keeping those who think they know doing the bidding of the Left.

    • Pinkagendist

      March 26, 2014

      You’re way too involved in your good vs. evil, black and white views to comprehend politics in an accurate manner.
      It’s much more complex than that and you should begin by studying more history- including how the term began to be used.

      The first people referred to as the right, or conservatives, were those in the French National Assembly who wanted to conserve the monarchy. Those to the left were in favour of the change to a republic. From there whole ideological packages were put together. The European right generally taking the position of conserving things as they were traditionally and the left proposing change.
      And your ‘Greeks say’, is totally unrealistic. Greeks don’t say anything as a monolith. Greece is made up by a number of different parties and ideologies, each with their own agenda.

    • Hmmm… Even with this new retort I don’t need to add anything to my comment.
      Everything I said is still fact. I’m well aware of the multiple parties in Greece and it changes nothing. The “far too complex” comment is designed to appear deep while being unclear. It is also a weak attempt to stifle an argument you do not want to confront. The preservation of Monarchy (the Feudal system based on Divine Right) is exactly why Socialism exists today. The Statist/Marxist approach was a way to keep the Aristocracy in Power with the support of the Masses. And as you’re illustrating, It still works.
      I know you believe yourself to be better equipped to argue such “complex” issues, but you never know who you’re going to run into on the net. And you never know what credentials they might have. So be careful assuming you’re right and everybody else is ignorant.
      On the upside, these types of exchanges might lead you to new perspectives, then again may be not.
      Finally, when it comes to Freedom and Liberty of the Individual it is Black and White. If you don’t see it that way then you might not have given it enough thought. Keeping people’s minds dwelling in the gray areas and denying Reason, Rationale and Meaning by implying it’s Enlightened is just another way to keep them subservient to those in Control. Don’t fall for that.


    • Again, you’re so taken by your little Cowboys versus Indians war in your own head, that it’s blinding your ability to look at anything in a reasonable manner. As a historian, my interest in the topic is the history of politics and you’re misrepresenting and oversimplifying to a ridiculous degree.
      Do you not realize the very basic notion that preserving monarchies is equally a way of maintaining an aristocracy?

      Authoritarian regimes (whatever they say their political affiliation is, left or right) simply emulated the absolutist monarchies of old. They all function on the model supported by the people who sat on the right of the French assembly, and that model was one of aristocracy. Further, they emulated the symbolism and thought processes that were made popular by monotheistic religions. There’s always a ‘supreme leader’ who represents perfection and everyone else’s value in the social group is measured by their connections to that central figure. Just look at the amount of Lenin statues all over the former Soviet Union, or how many streets and squares in Spain were named after General Franco; Or that North Korea puts out a list of haircuts that are ‘legal’.

      Separating traditional conservatism from monarchy, aristocracy, and the defence of both is a monumental historical error.

Nothing could be further from the truth.  All of the examples of “Right-Wing” pink cites are in fact Fascist.  But what’s even more interesting is the attempt by pink to bring in the term of “traditional conservatism” as a Leftist Ideology as well.  “Traditional Conservatism” does not have the same meaning in the US as it does in Europe because our Political Spectrum is not solely made up of Socialist Variants.  They have done the same thing to the term “Liberal” which has a very different meaning in Europe than it does here in the US.)

This is a common way Leftists pollute the discussion in order to avoid talking about Limited Government and Individual Freedom as a Political Model.  (The Model We in the United States adopted.  And a Paradigm whose mere existence is a threat to every other Governing Theory in the World.)

While there are certainly those on the “Right” of the US political spectrum who erroneously describe themselves as Capitalist when they are in reality Fascist, it does not change the meaning of Capitalism.  Those who describe themselves as such are currently being exposed for their subterfuge.

Capitalism is the Economic/Political Paradigm of Free Markets, Limited Government and the Right of Property Ownership all of which in combination is a formula that protects the Freedom and Liberty of The Individual.

This Concept is foreign to those in France, as it is most of the World over.  It is also oddly foreign to University Students.  Often this discussion can only be found in Economics classes.  Because of this, it is often excused by other areas of study such as History and Political Science as strictly an economic model which has nothing to do with Government.  The fact that we allow this is a luxury for the Left.

In truth, Capitalism is mutually exclusive from any type of Leftist Governing Theory which is why Liberals would rather just ignore it than include it in substantive discussion.  And if they are forced into a corner the last resort is to argue against Fascism and call it Capitalism.

Thus, in trying to win the “high ground” among Leftists they will intentionally confuse the concepts in the hopes of protecting whichever Flavor of Oppressive Government they champion.  (Remember, the most common type of violence the World has known has been Socialist on Socialist.  The only Concept they enjoy attacking more than Individual Liberty is the barely discernible differences they exhibit from each other.  And yes, Religion as Government being a Statist ideology in nature has also exhibited this tendency and is included in this observation.)

In terms of protecting the Individual while promoting the Welfare of All…

Capitalism Stand Alone.

Le Pen no more represents the “Right Wing” as we understand it here in the US than Franco, Mussolini or Pinochet.  Or for that matter, Hitler.

The fact that pink does not expose his ideology specifically doesn’t matter in this example.  The fact that he uses the language of the Left in an attempt to create a separation between those on the “left” side of the Socialist Spectrum and the “right” side of the Socialist Spectrum is what allows for this conversation.  My issue with his posts was the apparent defense of the “left” side…  There is no Defense for Socialism in any form.  But the Progressives know full well that Hitler and the rest of those who kill their own people don’t add anything to promoting Social Control of the Individual.

“Greece is made up by a number of different parties and ideologies, each with their own agenda.” – from above comment thread

In the above sentence pink exposes his tactic.  Indeed there are “a number of different parties”, but the Ideologies are different in only the most minute ways.  And their Agenda’s are all the same… to wrest control of the Government and the Population in order to impose or perpetuate Socialist Governing Theory.  Contrary to pinks final comment, it does not require a “supreme leader” in order to impose Tyranny over a population, the majority can do that all on their own.  And to my point, that is why Democratic Socialism always represents Oppression of the Individual and often fertile ground for the “supreme leaders” pink speaks of to subsequently rise to power.

(In our spectrum, The only Theory to the “Right” of Capitalism is Anarchy.  And it is Rare indeed that One can find anyone capable of defining Anarchy Correctly.  That concept deserves its own place in history as one of the most disfigured concepts.  It’s to the point that Anarchy in present day definition means Angry Bomb Throwers for Communists.  But I digress.)





About Mike

Background is in Media with a little History Major thrown in just to be annoying. View all posts by Mike

10 responses to “Le Pen

  • twistnpout

    A most interesting discussion. I can see how lines are being blurred in the US though. It seems to have come down to only two choices – those who want to control your personal life and those who want to take all your money – both for the betterment of society (each side will claim). Both parties here seem to have socialist agendas. And I use that word in it’s loosest term. Any group that aims to control what you say, how much money you are allowed to make, what form of birth control you can use, or infringe on any other personal freedom to me definitely borders on something dangerous, regardless of what label you want to give it. Too bad some people can’t admit it. Instead of aligning themselves with a certain group and defending that groups ideas/theories to the death, it would be nice if they could use some common sense.


    • Mike

      Taking all your money IS controlling you. Controlling you REQUIRES taking all your money.
      This is one of the reason I support limited Government and vehemently oppose the government take over of anything… healthcare, corporation and individual businesses via OSHA and the EPA etc. It’s all about control. And it’s all about taking all your money.

      In fact, once you understand that there is a group/mindset in the United States that believes the “money” is the owned by the Government and not a representation of your production… thus You Own It… you will begin to see who to support.

      I’m not sure about your birth control point. Who is telling you what kind of birth control you cannot use? I’m aware of people not wanting to pay for Your birth control, but I’m unaware of anyone restricting your choice… I’m pretty sure the debate is currently about my not being FORCED to pay for your choices. Please correct me if I’m missing something.

      The dividing line between ideologies is Force.

      Unfortunately we may disagree on something. I will defend Individual Freedom and Liberty and will align myself with groups that support both and see that as Common Sense… While my having to defend it to the Death as you put it, I have not had to test that yet. But I can tell you my Freedom, and by correlation Your Freedom are of Paramount importance to me.

      That fact puts me at odds with 100% of the Democrat Party and roughly 80% of the Republican Party.

      My involvement with groups last as long as their actions support Freedom of Choice and the Capitalist System that protects it. Once they stray I have two choices, either work to change the behavior or remove myself from supporting them. I think this should be an approach shared by everyone. If that’s the common sense we’re talking about then we might agree.

      I would end with reminding you that Bipartisanship and Compromise (If that is what you are talking about) is what got us here. And “Here” is a very bad place indeed. It’s time to dig deep and determine what your ideological foundation is and why so you and make decisions based on something other than “getting along” with those who wish to control you but would never say so to your face. It will also help you recognize those people quickly and allow you to decide what kind of relationship you want to have with them.

      does that make sense?


      • twistnpout

        Well, I should have known better than to jump into a discussion I have little time to delve into – when will I learn? I just enjoy the conversations so much at times it is hard not to chime in…

        I’d say you are a bit wrong that my point was to say you should be FORCED to pay for my choices. ON the other hand, we have to take the good with the bad and YES – it is about compromise and bipartisanship – you say that like it is a bad thing. When done by people with the ability to put personal preferences aside, their own feelings, I think there is potential to achieve many great things. Will everyone be happy? No. But really too bad. Am I wrong to read you are saying it isn’t FAIR you may have to pay for,something you disagree with?



        • Mike

          Three quick points… and then TBC.

          1. If Men were Angels there would be no need for Government.

          2. “Fair” is only an excuse for Force. Fairness has never existed in the Universe nor will it ever exist.
          I’m going to put up two old posts just for you. 🙂

          3. Words like “May”, “Could” and “Should” are used to remove truth and actual intent from statements. I’m going to add one more old post having to do with the phrasing of Force.

          All for You Pout!


          • twistnpout

            Ummmm Thank you? i totally agree with number one – but then that invites another thread about environmental protections, minimum wage, health care – all things some would say the government should stay out of, but where would we be if corporations/people were left to decide without any regulations or dare I say, forced compliance? You said yourself men are not angels, I take that to mean they can’t be trusted to always do the right thing and therefore should be told what they SHALL do, not what they SHOULD do.

            2. Universally speaking – life is not fair, true that – but that can not be an excuse for poverty or other ills of life that could be alleviated just a little by striving for some level of compassion, empowering Again – probably another topic.

            3. I just had a similar conversation with someone a few days ago. I look forward to reading the post.

            Thanks again.
            And again TBC…


            • Mike

              1. No… Men must be Protected from Each Other, particularly those who have been given the power to Force (Government). this is how we were Established which is one of the Reasons We, The United states is Unique in the World. And… I’ll add an old minimum Wage Post, again… just for you.

              2. Nothing I believe in advocates neglect of Compassion or Empathy on a Personal read Individual Level. But Who are You to tell me what I Must be Compassionate about? Who am I to tell you the same?


  • insanitybytes22

    You make a good point. I know it’s true, I’ve seen it and I hear it parroted by people who don’t know the slightest thing about history or politics. In many people’s minds socialism is the Left, it’s all that is good and glorious and democratic. The Right is fascism, dictators, all Christian by the way, even Mao. I’m not sure what Stalin was up to, spreading the gospel apparently.

    People, especially recent college grads, have been so brainwashed, even if you present them with facts and evidence they won’t believe you. Rather than a rigid concept of black and white, the truth actually requires you to expand your belief system and look at the whole picture objectively. That’s difficult to do if you’ve been programmed with misinformation.


    • Mike

      Absolutely. That’s why I pulled the exchange from Snake’s post for my group to see. Pink is not uneducated, he is ill-educated. It’s the Smart Stupid that Liberal Professors create to promote the Leftist Worldview. Much of what he said is true, but it was all used to create room between Fascism and Socialism where there is none. He seems young, hopefully he’ll find his way.


  • Rattlesnake

    Doesn’t anarchy basically connect the far-right of the freedom vs. authoritarianism spectrum (which I will define as the extreme end of the freedom side) with the far-left? Anarchy doesn’t involve protection of individual rights, so it basically devolves into mob rule, which is most likely going to be authoritarian in nature. That is my understanding, anyway.


    • Mike

      No. Anarchy does have one theory to the right of it… it’s Nihilism. The problem with trying to connect Anarchy and Nihilism to the Left is that both of the former lack a desire to Control the Individual. Anarchists look only to be left alone but recognize no authority even if they infringe on your Natural Rights. Nihilists view their existence to Destroy all Systems of cooperation voluntary or otherwise. Their purpose is to infringe on your Natural Rights. (The Joker in the Batman series is created using the Nihilist Template.)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: