Five reasons Macron must not be re-elected
Under the Macron administration, the erosion of French nationhood has accelerated dramatically.
1. He is drowning in a sea of scandals
In 2017, the French presidential election was dominated by the Penelope Fillon affair. Having led in the polls for months, Republican candidate Francois Fillon found himself embroiled in a scandal involving his wife which would derail his entire campaign. First leaked in French newspaper Le Canard Enchainé, Mr Fillon was accused of having paid his wife 500,000 euros as his “assistant” despite doing little-to-no work. Just days after the article was released, Mr Fillon was placed under formal investigation by the Parquet National Financier (PNF) before the first round of voting. Despite allegedly misusing 4,800 times more public funding, the silence from both the media and the PNF surrounding Emmanuel Macron is rather deafening.
‘Mckinseygate’, published in a 350-page parliamentary report, unearthed a plethora of corruption, ranging from gross misuse of public funds to tax evasion and clear conflict of interests. Delving deeper into the matter, the French Senate found the President had spent an eye-watering 2.4billion euros of the taxpayer’s money on consultancy fees since 2018 for advice on a wide range of reforms, including Macron’s unpopular refinement of the French pension system. Mckinsey, the American consultancy firm in question, had previously assisted Emmanuel Macron in his 2017 presidential campaign, with around twenty members of the firm’s staff having helped him to write his electoral programme. Despite having continuously complained about the size and cost of the French civil service, the former Socialist Economic Minister chose to overlook his national arsenal in favour of extra spending costs on foreign consultancy. During the pandemic, the President’s use of Mckinsey in advising the Government on its vaccine strategy (including the introduction of the infamous vaccine passport) arguably caused a major conflict of interest since the American firm was simultaneously consulting vaccine producer Pfizer. To make matters worse, the report found that Mckinsey had not paid any taxes in France for the last ten years thanks to the tax optimisation it had set up in Delaware.
As the old Chinese proverb states, good things come in pairs. Indeed, the incumbent was concurrently faced with a second scandal surrounding his former employers at the Rothschild bank. As per the law in France, Emmanuel Macron declared his heritage wealth – a measly 500,000 euros. A study made by Off Investigation, however, revealed the French President had earned over three million euros during his time with the bank. As an associate, it is highly likely he received several bonuses for successful mergers (such as the one he orchestrated between Nestlé and Pfizer) which were placed into fiscal paradises. In addition to this, the investigative journalists calculated that Macron had earned a whopping 1.4million euros during his time in Government. Such mammoth figures would suggest the President may have lied about his wealth and thus broken electoral rules.
The two aforementioned cases are just the latest in a sea of corruption which has swept through the President’s tenure. The sleaze which oozes from Emmanuel Macron’s portfolio is unquestionably the worst we have seen in decades of French politics. A rather impressive achievement for a French president.
2. The erasure of France
The General Charles de Gaulle once claimed France “cannot be France without its grandeur”. Despite its humiliating capitulation to the Nazis during the war, a country mostly reduced to rubble, the General’s presidential restoration saw France return to its former glory; reinstating France as Europe’s leading economy, establishing itself as a nuclear power, gaining a permanent seat on the UN’s security council and becoming a trusted third-party mediator during the cold war. Macronism can thus be depicted as the antithesis of De Gaulle’s France. Indeed, the Macron administration seeks to reduce the stature and importance of France in any way, shape or form.
French political scientist Pierre-Yves Rougeyron once explained that a country’s first step towards losing its sovereignty is allowing its population to lose confidence in its own civilisation and culture. For decades now, the French have been induced by their traitorous establishment class into believing that the sixth biggest economy, the largest maritime power, the third biggest nuclear power and the sixth largest exporter of goods is not capable of surviving without the governance of bureaucrats from Brussels.
Under the Macron administration, however, the erosion of French nationhood has accelerated dramatically. Despite over 1,500 years of French civilisation, Macron had the audacity to publicly state that “French culture did not exist”. Reinforced by the arrival of over two million migrants in five years, the French President has clearly abandoned the Republican tradition of cultural assimilation in favour of laissez-faire multiculturalism.
To add insult to injury, Macron equally made an appearance on American television where he insisted “we must deconstruct and rewrite French history”. The French President has also humiliated French conservatives and patriots by ridiculing the country’s important historical landmarks and heritage. Many were left stunned by the images of quasi naked men being allowed to provocatively parade around the Élysée Palace during the Festival of Music in France. Moreover, the President also tried to appeal to the deracinated youth by inviting YouTube pranksters to the Palace and allowing them to make a mockery of the place. In doing so, the President extinguished the divine light which once shone upon the heart of French power.
In the sci-fi classic Matrix, villain Mr Smith asks the protagonist Neo why he continues to get up and persist. This scene draws great parallels to the Macronites who question those who continue to resist the abandonment of national independence in favour of more European integration. The Eurofederalists in power thus attack the national myths which are the foundation of the nation state. Henceforth, the grandeur of the heroes that resisted the disappearance of the French nation, such as Jean d’Arc and Charles de Gaulle, is diluted. Indeed, when evoking the leader of the French resistance in their speeches, members of Macron’s Government often reduce de Gaulle to simply a man who believed in universal human rights and someone who was rather inclusive. As the history books will tell us, however, the General was so much greater than that. It is only in a world of mediocracy, however, that the likes of Emmanuel Macron can achieve power.
Arguably the most profound symbol of national erasure can be sighted at the tomb of the unknown soldier where the French tricolour flag has been replaced with that of the EU. Whether one is pro-remain or leave, one cannot ignore the insolent rewriting of history which seeks to detach the idea of national independence from the resistance movement. Furthermore, one must understand the history behind the EU flag. Indeed, having voted to give the traitorous and anti-Semitic Pétain Government its emergency powers, Jean Monnet, who would become a founding father of the EU, left for the United States where he would become a political advisor. In 1942, he wrote to the White House stating that Charles de Gaulle was the enemy of the French people and must be stopped at all costs. Just a year before the creation of the Common Market, Monnet himself wrote that we would “make Europe in order to rid ourselves of France”. The Macron administration’s decision is not just a simple changing of flags. It is the defaming of a national monument of resistance with a flag which symbolises the wanton destruction of that nation.
Roland Lescure, a prominent member of the Macron Government, has admitted that Macron’s second term would envision “an end to the Gaullist heritage, a condemnation of protectionist tentation and a clear path towards European federalism”. Furthermore, the national assembly member also predicted that by 2030, France will have ceded its permanent seat on the UN’s security council to the EU.
3. Crony capitalism to the detriment of national sovereignty
Under the ‘re-industrialisation’ page of his campaign booklet, Macron’s team tried to illustrate the industrial potential of his Government with a picture of a motor produced by French aerospace company Ariane. The only problem is that the production of the motor, under Macron’s precise instructions, has been transferred to Germany. This should have come as no surprise, deriving from a Government which has carved up key French industries throughout its time in power; selling Alcatel to the Finnish, Lafarge to the Swiss and Essilor to the Italians.
Coming to the end of Macron’s first term, France’s commercial deficit now stands at a record-breaking 82billion euros. This feat is even more impressive when one considers the country’s rich history of production in textile and luxury products as well as being the second most arable country in Europe. To make matters worse, a total of two million industrial jobs have been lost in France during the same period. While preaching about the need for more European integration to protect French industrial sovereignty, the Macron administration has overseen record numbers of offshoring and relocating of enterprises abroad. Throughout his first term, the former Rothschild banker has regurgitated the need for a stronger and more integrated Europe to counterbalance the US and China. Ironically however, sixty per cent of the world’s offshoring and economic dumping happens with the EU itself.
The Macron administration has thus exposed itself to be a Government which understands the price of everything but the value of nothing. Moreover, the sales of France’s key industries have been exacerbated by cronyism behind them. From the very beginning of his mandate, Emmanuel Macron made his intentions very clear when he put forward the proposal of privatising Paris Airport. As they say, however, the devil is in the detail. Indeed, the transaction of the sale was to be handled by Bank of America whose director, Bernard Mourad, was a political advisor to Emmanuel Macron during his 2017 election campaign.
The greatest scandal of all, however, was undoubtedly the sale of Alstom to the American company General Electric. Most vitally, Alstom supplied the turbines to French nuclear power stations which provide seventy per cent of the country’s electricity. Stretching back to De Gaulle’s policy of independent energy security, Alstom was not simply a company; it was a guarantor of national sovereignty in energy.
Having continually denied any involvement in the sale, the evidence soon began to mount up against Macron. Stretching as far back as 2012, the former Socialist minister was found to have commissioned a 300,000 euros report from the AT Kearney firm in October 2012 to test the eventual sale of Alstom to General Electrics. To make things worse, the former Rothschild banker had failed to notify his supervising minister Arnaud Montebourg, breaking ministerial code.
Fast-forward two years and Macron was still backing General Electrics during a reunion of Government Ministers. Much to the dismay of his colleagues, the future President was ardently pushing for his Government to accept the American enterprise’s bid for Alstom. While most Government Ministers were admittedly prepared to accept the offer, they would only do so if certain conditions were met. Macron, however, was prepared to support General Electrics unconditionally. It was later revealed that the future President was receiving notes from his former employers at the Rothschild bank to lobby the Government in favour of General Electrics.
Since the passing of a 2005 decree, the French Economic Minister has had the power to veto the sale of any key strategic industry. At every possible stage, however, Emmanuel Macron chose to waive his privileges and allowed the sale to happen. Furthermore, the Macron 2017 campaign email leaks found that many of his donors had benefitted from the sale of Alstom. Notably, Hugh Baily, former advisor to Emmanuel Macron, who was magically appointed the new head of General Electrics France following its purchase of Alstom.
The betrayal of Alstom is a scandal I go into greater detail in the latest print issue of Bournbrook. One thing is certain, however. If Macron were to have five more years in power, France would be reduced to a car boot sale for the president’s cronies.
4. His treatment of France’s ‘deplorables'
The landmark moment of the 2016 US election was arguably when Hillary Clinton accidentally let slip her contempt for the average white working class American, describing them as “deplorables” during one of her campaign speeches. While pre-election Emmanuel Macron portrayed himself as a Liberal humanist, his time in power has been marred by his obvious contempt for the French popular classes. The French President goes further than Hillary Clinton. His disdain for France’s deplorables is not a hidden sentiment but is in fact a badge of honour. The General Charles de Gaulle once famously stated that the role of a leader is to treat the most vulnerable in our society with the dignity that they deserve. Macron’s five years in power, however, have sought to treat France’s lowest classes with the least dignity possible.
Evidently, the French President has been suffering from a legitimacy crisis since his arrival in office. As French anthropologist Emmanuel Todd points out, Macron’s 2017 presidential first round voters had a negative correlation of -0.93 with that of Marine Le Pen’s – an unprecedented feat for two second-round candidates. In other words, Macron’s election had little more substance than representing the empty antithesis to LePenism. As a result, Macron has sought to gain the respect of his subjects through authority.
Macron’s televised public appearances are often characterised by his condescending nature. Indeed, one will often find the French President trying to intellectually humiliate factory workers, farmers and truck drivers who question his detrimental policies. Furthermore, the former Rothschild banker has come under fire for his degrading comments which include telling the French (who have suffered from double-figure unemployment rates for the best part of four decades) to “simply cross the road to find a job” and stating that a station is where you could find “those who are successful and those who are nothing”. Such comments are not only unworthy of any statesman but also reveal a complete detachment from reality.
During the pandemic, Macron openly stated that he wished to “p**s off” the unvaccinated who he deemed “second-class citizens”. Consequently, the unvaccinated were publicly humiliated, cut off from all aspects of their social lives and continuously harassed by police in public spaces. Macron’s nadir, however, was undeniably the Gilets Jaunes crisis. With eleven deaths and over 25,000 injuries, hundreds of which included life-long injuries of lost hands, blindness and fractured skulls, Macron’s law enforcement reached numbers which would make any third-world dictator proud. In fact, when France’s Champs d'Elysée were filled with military tanks to deal with anti-vaccine passport protests, El Salvador’s President decried the hypocrisy of the Western world which would have labelled his own Government as a “dictatorship” if it had done the same.
Macron’s heavy-handedness against the French proletariat can be explained by the fact that he has foraged for a solid electoral base. In doing so, he has successfully espoused the fears of the boomer generation with that of the bourgeoisie. Looking back on his illustrious career, Charles de Gaulle once stated: “We have beaten the Germans, we have stopped the Communists from getting into power, we have stood up to the Americans but the only thing which we have never been able to achieve is making the bourgeoisie patriotic.” Emmanuel Macron also understood this and was able to talk to a generation of older voters who do not care about the civilisation in question and who have built a part of their lives on the civilisational downgrading of France.
5. A moribund opposition brought back to life under a Le Pen presidency
Admittedly, Marine Le Pen and her politics are not my cup of tea. Nevertheless, her election would certainly reactivate some constitutional safeguards which have been sleeping throughout Macron’s tenure.
First and foremost, one must understand that it is all but certain that Marine Le Pen’s party would not have a majority in the National Assembly. Indeed, the two-round voting system used in the legislative elections makes it very difficult for the National Rally to win many seats. In fact, in the previous legislative elections, the National Rally received just eight seats, despite coming third in the popular vote and receiving five times the votes of the Communists who took ten seats. Consequently, a Le Pen presidency would thus transform France from a presidential democracy to a de facto parliamentary democracy.
Having already been questioned on the matter, Madame Le Pen has stated that she would not be afraid to use referenda to push through her policies. Her statement caused an uproar amongst the liberal establishment. While one member of Macron’s party described her move as a “constitutional coup d’état”, one prominent journalist had the audacity to claim that Mrs Le Pen, in trying to “bypass representative democracy”, was following in the footsteps of “authoritarian regimes”.
Such ignorant comments have exposed the Macron project to be both anti-democratic and anti-Gaullist. Indeed, many seem to have forgotten that the French fifth republic, founded by the General, was intended to reduce the powers of the French Parliament whose inability to hold a coalition for more than a year led to a period of major instability during the fourth republic. The leader of the French resistance himself was a constitutional monarchist in his youth and was deeply sceptical of parliamentary democracy which he believed would lead to a system which encouraged people to place their party’s interest over that of the country. As a result, de Gaulle reformed France’s democracy to strengthen the executive branch of the government. To compensate, however, the General introduced more direct democracy via referenda. The big constitutional questions facing France would thus be settled directly by the French public. When questioned on France’s constitutional checks and balances, de Gaulle once famously stated that “the only supreme court in France is the people”.
Despite having had many referenda throughout its history, the last one to take place in France was in 2005 on the question of the new EU constitution. A resounding fifty-five per cent of the French said NO that day. As expected, their vote was ignored. Since then, the French elite have become ardent demophobes. A president with very limited powers and a hunger for more direct democracy would thus be a welcome change from the unaccountable authoritarianism that has dominated France for the past five years.
