The name of Europe is Marine Le Pen
Principles of electorial geopolitics
I would like to say a few words concerning the first and the second rounds of the elections in France. Let me draw you attention to the electoral geopolitics – to the fact that the Eastern part of France voted for Marine Le Pen and the West of France voted for Macron. This map reminds of many other maps at once.
For example, it resembles a map of Ukraine's Yushchenko's -Yanukovych elections, when Donbass, the East of Ukraine and the Crimea voted for one candidate - the candidate of the Eurasian orientation, a right-wing conservative and pro-Russia candidate. And there was also a westernized candidate, who received support from the west of Ukraine. It's amazing that we see the same thing in the electoral geopolitics of France. I want to recall, that the French expert in electoral geopolitics Yves Lacoste, who was trying to analyze things in geopolitical terms with burning eyes, during these French elections suddenly disappeared, because everything he practiced about small geopolitics has been washed away with a big wave, so now is just the time to talk about electoral geopolitics, at which everyone used to laugh… But Lacoste is no longer there ... There is even no Chauprade, who shamefully called to vote for Macron ... Unfortunately, Chauprade, who was a very good geopolitician, disappeared ... into the abyss, saying that one need to «faire barrage» for Marine Le Pen...
Well, as politicians are sold, we know… Much cheaper is to buy analysts and experts - just for a penny: someone will give alms to such an analyst, throw a pack of money, a couple thousands of dollars, at least ten thousand bucks – and an expert or an analyst is tied down like a pig , waiting for the next handout.
I want to draw your attention to the fact that France is split according to the geopolitical principles. There is a Eurasian France, voting for Marine le Pen. Let's pay attention to the magnificent map, which demonstrates the electoral situation in the north, east and south of France. In these areas we fix the compact residence of the Eurasian French .. This can be called "French Novorossia."
If I were a German, I would rub my hands, because if we ask «who lives here, what this territory is about», it turns out that this is the territory of Normandy, Alsace and Burgundy., It is strange enough, but this is the third destiny of Charlemagne, these are the lands that Lothar inherited from Charlemagne - from the great Lorraine to Switzerland. Here we are faced with alternative geopolitics not only of the past, but of the Present and Future. The fate of Lothar, which extends from the Netherlands and Normandy to Switzerland is in fact the most interesting thing that only exists. Lotar's lot is also Burgundy. And this alternative Burgundy also voted for Marine Le Pen. The map you see is a very curious one that allows you to see the Central German (not East German, namely Central German) - Lorraine space. This is the Third Europe. In History there was a French Europe, Charles the Bald had Germanic Europe, and there was Lorraine -- the third Europe, "Swiss Europe", as it is called, which now votes for Marine Le Pen. This is a continental Europe. In other words, in France, while voting, the country was faced with pure geopolitics. In addition to the ideologies ("populism against the system," "Macron as a spare part of globalism, which differs nothing from the dust in the Paris metro, left by some Arabs, from which the debris is poured", because in this character there is no ontology) there is still geopolitics, Le Pen is a very serious politician as she has a real geopolitical model.
Our map reveals the geopolitics of the first round. If nowadays Europeans had at least a drop of consciousness, which they certainly do not have, they should pay it serious attention, because this testifies to the rightness of Dumezil and structuralism, that nothing ever dissappears, that everything remains in Eternity, which is not represented on the surfice. But if the system is just a little shaken, we'll see that the lines of force
of civilizations, cultures, peoples, logoses and identities, determines the results of nowadays elections. The power lines of Europe have not disappeared anywhere. Perhaps it will take another 15 years, and Europe will say: «These regions voted for Abu Muslim, those voted for Jean» There will be another geopolitics, a geopolitics of integration. But now we see an old Europe, still divided into Atlantic,coastal, and continental, Germanic parts. Whether voters understand this or not, these things are the constants.
Simbol of our struggle
Secondly, I think that Marine Le Pen is one of the fundamental symbols of our struggle, like Trump on the eve of elections, more precisely, as "trampism". I would like to draw your attention to Ann Coulter who, when asked if she continues to insist on the slogan "in Trump we trust", answered - "In trumpism we trust". ( Ann Coulter wrote a book with this name "In Trump we trust", after it, or in time of it, but in the last analisis this is not important: what is important is the unity of approach and analysis), So, this "trumpist Trump", "Trump of the election campaign era" is a huge symbol, and it has not dissapeared, and is a fundamental factor of global geopolitics. Now in the Western Atlantic, in the United States there is a very important factor which confirm that the great part of American people voted for the anti-globalization agenda. The world elite tries to destroy this symbol, to brake and recode Trump, and make this symbol to be forgotten. This symbol is now being closed by the Americans, but Trumpism is an irreversible phenomenon. What happened during the American elections is a fundamental factor for us -- this is what is now called "Steve Bannon, Alex Jones, Alt-right." Perhaps they will not be able to translate this into an intellectual headquarters now (although they say that Bannon, since he is the bearer of the idea of a "trumpist Trump", can create an alternative headquarters right now). Maybe not today, but this headquarters will be created in future. I do not know when it will be created, but it certainly will be, because such powerful support that was provided to the Trump platform in the US can not simply disappear. In other words, this is the most important, fundamental moment, no matter how it is called, and no matter how it is going to be reorganized in the next stage Trump today is a typical half solar-half lunar type.
It's just a classical situation, concerning not only American president. There are two Trumps, sunny and lunar, the sunny one remained in the campaign, now we are dealing with the lunar Trump. But the sun is always there. The solar Trump can’t disappear or escape anywhere from the position of ontology of Eternity. And the archetype of the solar Trump always exists, and it is irreversibly present on the map of new geopolitics.
The second factor is Marine le Pen. That's what I am stating for these elections, coming to their second round: this is a fundamentally different story, different from 2002, when Jean-Marie Le Pen, the father of Marine, was advanced to the second round. He looked like a whipping boy then: he was supported by only "extreme right", which are rather numerous in France, but not enough to change the political system. The “extreme right” gathered together and voted for him, barrage was then total, there was no way out of this extremely right-wing electorate, which gradually increased by 2002. Jean-Marie conducted a perfectly normal campaign, picking out his whole electorate totally but adding only two percents in the second round.
Now there is a completely different situation. Marine Le Pen has left the party management, because now she is a pole of all-European resistance. She is a representative of another Europe. Marine herself can win or lose, she can be hijacked just like Trump...
But there is something irreversible in her victory in the first round. And now we have to fix this. She may not recognize Crimea, she may be re-coded - it can happen with her individually. But archetypically nothing will happen with Marin Le Pen anymore, because she showed that with minimal technology, minimal attention to modern models and standards, with very limited resources, practically no resources (“Front National” has very small resources) victory can be won. And this is real politics. Just like with Trump.
Trump's resources were also rather limited; everything was against him - all the money of the world, all the authorities of the world, all the institutions of the world. He turned to the people's support, made a small tunnel in the system array, and broke the system... The same situation with France - there are insignificant funds that Marin spent, in comparison with Macron. Sums of money, spent by both candidates, differ in thousand of times. But in spite of the microscopic financial potential, Marine Le Pen focusing on the power of people, on geopolitical platform on which Europe and the world holds, on the platform of peoples gives the colossal result. We state that Marine Le Pen went beyond the boundaries reserved for the "extreme right" ghetto, and now she is the leader of the Resistance not only of the "extreme right", but of the whole people. She actually put a halter on a Populist Moment. - All other applicants -- Fillon etc.-- showed themselves as reptilian worms of the system, part of Macrons’ camp ( If Macron himself is a spare part of the system, Fillon turned out to be an epiploon of Macron).
Real and false Populism
Mélenchon is a eurosceptic and uses the concept "people". But in his case it is not Populism. Mélenchon serves one of the dimentions of the system, which, like Soros, moves in two directions. I will explain it. The global system is structured in the following way: ‘today” dominates the power of world capital, and “tomorrow” will reign the power of unbridled anti-fascist terrorist mobs. These two models complement each other. As earlier communism and capitalism competed, today liberalism and extreme left-wingers do it. The first represent the current state of affairs. The second manifest tomorrow's chaos. But they all shift from “today” to “tomorrow”. Soros acts both here and there – and this is the essence of liberalism to move “right” and “left” at the same time. Mélenchon is the “left” side of globalization. He is no populist, only Marine Le Pen is the populist, and all the people, working people, are populists, the people of France, extreme right, alt-right, postmodernists, right-wingers are real populists.
So, we eliminate Mélenchon from the populists, only Marine Le Pen remains. Now Marine no longer belongs to herself, she is now Jeanne D"Arc. From which part of France did Jeanne d'Arc perform? It is from the one that Marine is representing now? And where was Jeanne D”Arc burnt? This is a very interesting moment. Jeanne D"Arc is a conservative symbol of a continental deep, bottom, soil of France, soil of Europe. Now these archetypes come to life. And now, I want once again to fix the moment, Marine Le Pen no longer belongs to France, nor to the National Front, nor to herself (she already exceeded the limit of herself).
No more Marine Le Pen as an individuality exist.. As there is "Trump election", "trumpism", as there is “Putin”, who also does not own himself, because, whatever he does, saying “Putin”, people all over the world say "no" to the system of globalization. To say - "I'm for Putin! means to be antithesis to the world system. Imagine if Le Pen did not go to the second round? Can you imagine the situation? What if the globalists had already squeezed barrage in the first round? They would sigh with relief: "a threat passed, minimal risks, democracy won, Marine is a local phenomenon,"-- they would say, -- "it does not threaten us, we will not pay attention to it."
What happened now, after the first round, makes it almost unimportant how Marine behaves and how she will behave. From now on Marine Le Pen will be led by super forces -- she is already in the fundamental ray of the archetype. And this ray of archetype will bring it to the end. She labeled Europe. The name of Europe is Marine Le Pen. She reve
aled the true name of what Europe is. It is a very important point: I think that this is a real awakening of very deep archetypes, and it is the archetypes of a very specific, very special, paradoxical, but European Europe. This is the discovery of the second pole, analogous to the second pole of "trampist Trump"spirit, which is eternal and for which the American people voted, regardless of the fact that Trump was hijacked and recoded.
We are interested in the fundamental point: American people voted for Trump-Bennon, for Trump-Steve Miller, for Trump-Ann Coulter, for Trump, who is “in Trump we trust”. They voted for him, and it's irreversible, no matter what the experts say. This thing is irreversible.
The same irreversible phenomenon is Marin Le Pen now. We fix the historical moment – during these elections, between these elections the most important thing happened. And now it's not so important, what will happen next – if Marine wins or not in the second round.
First, she can win, because Brexit took place, and Trump's choice took place. In fact, the situation in France is formulated as follows: the people are against the establishment. One part of the people is completely zombied by the establishment. This should not be forgotten. And we have the same situation in Russia, and in America: not that one half of the population was for the establishment, but they are just zombies, withdrawn from the game, they are more "population" than "people".
The population and the people. Archeo-modern and the elections in France
We can say that the whole massive of inhabitants of any country together is both “people” and “population”. But in one part, in one half of this massive there are more people than population, and in the other - the population is larger than the people. The population is a statistical concept, a construct with which different forms of violence work. The population is a contingent that absorbs the globalist discourse, built on the principle of the domination of time. It can be liberal or communist or liberal-communist, or even nationalist, more precisely, sluggishly nationalistic. In other words, the population is a modernist part of society, to which the modernist scheme acts stronger than the traditionalist one. If we take the phenomenon of archeo-modern, this part is immersed more in modernity than in archaism. At the same time, there is people in which there is much more archaism than modernity. So, in every area of the world - in America, in Russia and in France - we see one and the same element of the archeo-modern, which is evident in the elections. In Russia, archeo-modern covers 90%, in America - slightly more than 50%: the American archeo-modern among the voters has given us Trump, that is, in America the archaic is slightly dominant. And naturally, it dominates in France: in the Jacobin Republican France, the moment of archaism actually dominates in many regions, where there are more "people" than "population". The proportion of modern and archaic and modern is about 50 to 50 today, and accordingly, the game goes for these percentages, that is, more in intermediate groups which become "population" or "people". And what will win here, in France, is a completely unpredictable thing. That’s why, I believe that Marine Le Pen has a chance to win. I'm not sure, and no one is sure, of course, that she will win, but I'm not sure she will lose - just like no one was sure of Brexit or Trump's victory. And it's clear that all the globalist opinion polls are pure nonsense. As we, sociologists, know, sociologically there is no public opinion, because public opinion is the opinion that the ruling elite instolls in the population, which can only be partially coordinated with the people. But agreeing or not agreeing with the people depends on how the elite will build their own strategy. Here comes the next point: these elections will show the gap between "the population”and "people". That is, conditionally speaking: there are 10-15% of the inhabitants in which the proportions between "the people and the" population "are not constant. They will choose. And either they are finished bastards - and then they will vote for Macron, and then they are "population". Or they are still a French people, and then they will find the strength and vote for the only right choice - for Marine Le Pen. In France, this is actually almost a religious choice. For the first time in Europe religious elections are taking place in our time. The moment is historical. In the same regime, in which elections are held in France today, religion changes happen in history, the outcome of civil wars is resolved, the royalists or Jacobins win, different nations are accepting Islam, Christianity or Judaism.
Two religions of today's historical moment
We can say that the whole massive of inhabitants of any country together is both “people” and “population”. But in one part, in one half of this mass there are more people than population, and in the other - the population is larger than the people. The population is a statistical concept, a construct with which different forms of violence work. The population is a contingent that absorbs the globalist discourse, built on the principle of the domination of time. It can be liberal or communist or liberal-communist, or even nationalist, more precisely, sluggishly nationalistic. In other words, the population is a modernist part of society, to which the modernist scheme acts stronger than the traditionalist one. If we take the phenomenon of archeo-modern, this part is immersed more in modernity than in archaism. At the same time, there is people in which there is much more archaism than modernity.
So, in every area of the world - in America, in Russia and in France - we see one and the same element of the archeo-modern, which is evident in the elections. In Russia, archeo-modern covers 90%, in America - slightly more than 50%: the American archeo-modern among the voters has given us Trump, that is, in America the archaic is slightly dominant. And naturally, it dominates in France: in the Jacobin Republican France, the moment of archaism actually dominates in many regions, where there are more "people" than "population". The proportion of modern and archaic and modern is about 50 to 50 today, and accordingly, the game goes for these percentages, that is, more in intermediate groups which become "population" or "people". And what will win here, in France, is a completely unpredictable thing. That’s why, I believe that Marine Le Pen has a chance to win.
I'm not sure, and no one is sure, of course, that she will win, but I'm not sure she will lose - just like no one was sure of Brexit or Trump's victory. And it's clear that all the globalist opinion polls are pure nonsense. As we, sociologists, know, sociologically there is no public opinion, because public opinion is the opinion that the ruling elite instolls in the population, which can only be partially coordinated with the people. But agreeing or not agreeing with the people depends on how the elite will build their own strategy. Here comes the next point: these elections will show the gap between "the population”and "people". That is, conditionally speaking: there are 10-15% of the inhabitants in which the proportions between "the people and the" population "are not constant. They will choose. And either they are finished bastards - and then they will vote for Macron, and then they are "population". Or they are still a French people, and then they will find the strength and vote for the only right choice - for Marine Le Pen. In France, this is actually almost a religious choice. For the first time in Europe religious elections are taking place in our time. The moment is historical. In the same regime, in which elections are held in France today, religion changes happen in history, the outcome of civil wars is resolved, the royalists or Jacobins win, different nations are accepting Islam, Christianity or Judaism.
The morning after... the elections: the political hangover
Now let us turn to the second stage of the French elections. The first thing I want to say is that: first, these elections are historic, decisive, which to a large extent predetermine the fate of Europe and the world.
Second - if the choice is made in favor of Macron, this choice is not absolute. This means that the French will choose a civil war. They will not get to the election of Marine Le Pen in 4 years. For 4 years, Macron - this Hollande number two, this not even "Mr. Jelly", but "Mr. Microchip" - will show the complete marasmus of what already was in France, only tenfold. Nothing will happen in the country: the old, arisen from the ashes of Finkelkraut or Glucksmann, Jacques Attali simply will tell with a groaning voice that «Money will save the world» then he will smile, and then dissolve. And there will be only the devouring garbage refugee - refugees with invalids will fill the streets together with the gay pride. And after several months of Macron's rule France will simply be closed for quarantine, and there will be flying scraps of paper, because nobody will clean the streets any longer. Through the trash zombie sleepwalkers with Macron's masks (instead of Anonymous mask) on their faces will walk around. France will come to an end much faster than its population thinks - and next - civil war will begin. People, who vote for Macron now, are voting for civil war, people who vote for Marine Le Pen (I want to say that they will vote for peace, but this does not work), they will also vote, but only for the correct version of the same.
The global conservative revolution
The conservative revolution in Europe is so tough because a conservative revolution can not win in one country. In other words, if the conservative revolution wins in France, it will be necessary to deal with the export of the conservative revolution, especially since it already took place halfway in Russia and in America, it will be necessary to engage in the conservative revolution. We must reject the nationalist version of the interpretation of the conservative revolution - the conservative revolution can only be global. That is, it is necessary to deal with the non-salvation of France in the organization of order there, it is still impossible, but we must energetically engage in the export of the conservative revolution to Germany, Austria, Italy, Hungary - where chaos is maturing. We need a world conservative revolution. In Russia, the situation is very similar - our forces are growing, our conservative trends in all parts of the world are acquiring a visible, tangible character, the crisis of the global liberal capitalist legal left system is evident, we are in a revolutionary moment, and it does not matter whether Marine Le Pen wins or not -- the situation is irreversibly shifting in our direction.
There are people, forces, social forces, which represent an archaic beginning, declare about themselves more and more loudly. Imagine that Macron wins, and Marine politely acknowledges the results of the election. After that, she can do nothing - she becomes a pole of attraction. She just can say "yes", "no", "good", "excuse me" because she becomes a staff, and her archetype starts acting at all. People start walking around with Marine badges, an intellectual movement arises, everyone says "I know how Marine thinks," "I know about her philosophy'. Immediately, the role of Alain Soral, and Alain de Benoist (in any case after these elections) immeasurably increases - and they will be heroes such as Steve Bannon or simply main theorists of resistance. It can be recognized or not, but it is absolutely accurate and it is irreversible in any scenario. Moreover, we imagine that Macron says: "Let's invite more migrants, we have too little of them for our liberal-capitalist needs, I do not like the current Paris, it's not dark enough in the evenings, let's make it dulled. And let's have more capital, cut taxes to the capitalists, cut the incomes of the middle class, and in general, the French should emigrate to virtuality, which we propose (although things do not go as fast as we would like, the technologies are slightly lagging behind, there are not enough virtual glasses for everyone , especially for new arrivals) ". And in fact, the French will migrate to virtual reality, and if they won't be quick enouth, they will understand what a real nightmare is. The morning of Macron, after the election of Macron, will be like the morning after a severe hangover. The French themselves will wonder with what ugly actions they had come in touch the day before. But they are prepared for this, they are stuffed, they are now narcotized with microchiped. But when they wake up, they will wake up "to war." The morning after Macron is a "good morning, war" in Europe. This is a very important point.
Intellectual subject – three poles
And the last moment. I believe that with Trump, with Le Pen and with what we have in Russia, we actually have three poles of a real world conservative revolution. And all these three poles are represented by intellectual subject centers. In Russia it is clear ho what i mean by this crnter. In America - this is Bennon and "alt-right", and alt-right more and more gives signs of subjectivity. Alt-rights are transformed from a sleeping cat into a thinking subject, albeit a little robot-like, a little feeble-minded, but nevertheless, it is a clear beginning of thinking subject. America has awakened subjectivity, conservative-revolutionary subjectivity, they are starting to think. "Alt-right" started talking with the words of "Limonka" of 1992 or 1993. This is a huge progress for Americans. And if we compare the discourse that they had before Trump's election, it was just a pitiful babble, absolutely clumsy, unshakeable, though correct, conservative, but absolutely irrelevant, absolutely unacceptable, throwing about an «old one-stored America». Or it was a marginal nonsense. Americans will form a subject, because in America there already exists a conservative-revolutionary subject in the primary stage. In France there is a magnificent, developed to a high degree and ready for work conservative-revolutionary entity: it's A.Soral and A. de Benoist. All that spins around Égalité et Réconciliation and "Éléments" - this is the bases of which the "National Front" (NF) ascended. On these ideas the entire FN lived for thirty or forty years, during which I was observing them. So, France has a real subject, and in Russia we have a subject. Thus, we have three examples of a conservative revolution with relatively diverse successes, and there are three absolutely concrete, clear subjects of the conservative revolution at different stages of crystallization.
And the French elections show that we have this subject. Since Le Pen got into the second round, this is an eschatological sign, which means "the time is close." From this it is necessary to draw the following conclusion. Where there is history, there is a subject. History is never done by the pig- masses. Pig-masses either come later when history is already made, or "people of history" come to drive the pig masses to certain events, because the pigs do not understand anything, only the people understand. The people, whose essence, according to Hegel and Heidegger, is their thinking elite. The thinking elite is the people. The thinking elite is a function of the people. Not of the population. And this thinking elite, which tells the people "Yes", it represents this people. It is not something separate from the people, It comes to the people, teaches them something, then leaves, but this thinking elite, can not go anywhere, because it is growing out of the people, it is the consciousness of the people. That's what the thinking elite is. And we see the emergence of such a thinking elite in America, we see the emergence of a thinking elite in France, and we have a thinking elite here in Russia. These three thinking elites rely on the three massives of people.
I think that the current situation is an invitation to a very active activity. And above all politics, social issues, economics, we must deal with political philosophy, revealing epistemological, metaphysical strategies, real strategies of political philosophy. Everything, that is happening in France now, has an irreversible character. The creation of a conservative-revolutionary international headquarters staff is on the agenda. At the same time, the three poles of this conservative international forces are quite clearly distinguishable - we, the Russians, the French and the Americans. All the rest will be grouped, gravitated, around us, like around the Sun. And, of course, there is a conservative-revolutionary Iran, in Turkey the processes are also going on. In fact, conservative revolutionary cells will now be formed all over the world, similar to how they were formed around the Communists in the late 19th century. The Communists are now completely in the hands of the representatives of Soros and the liberals, who simply offer them a dissolute agenda - to disintegrate, to dissolve from drugs. Today's Communists do not represent an alternative to modern society, because they have no discourse, it's just the decomposed discourse of the liberals, only at a more advanced stage of decay. That is, the liberals defends what is happening today, and the liberal-communists, the current left-wing liberals, are defending what will be tomorrow. This is Macron, only aged, but not with a beard, because the beard does not grow at this floor.
I think that right now the situation of a real conservative revolution is preparing, all the prerequisites are ready for it. We can assume that a tripartite structure, that now is being laid, (speaking of European humanity - America, France and Russia) is a conservative revolutionary axis with three poles. But I think that at the same time we must closely monitor similar trends, which are expressed in the following points: 1) the constellation around A.Soral and A.D. Benoist in Europe, 2) the special locus of Latin America, as it thinks for a long time in this direction, without much success, support and visible results, but intellectually, socio-politically and even institutionally productive: certain things have matured in Latin America and therefore we must pay attention to it. 3) Iran is a ready-made example of a overriped conservative revolution, which was so successful and early emerged, that the Iranians themselves, probably, hardly realize themselves as a great example. Accordingly, there are other countries that somehow will be able to regain this example.
Therefore, I think that today conservative-revolutionary discourse, first of all, precise conservative-revolutionary analysis and monitoring on the basis of the conservative-revolutionary discourse of multipolarity, the fourth political theory and Eurasianism, which are topical for all, is topical today. Therefore, I propose to focus efforts on an English language, on communications with the French and American poles, first of all, and with the rest contries as far as possible. And here the exchange of positions and understanding, careful reading, disputes, elucidating "who is right - who is not right", debates about the new conceptual apparatus, developments of new formulas, down to memes, becomes a very important task, because we have entered an entirely new world.