“Time to burn down the Bastille.”

Pat Buchanan’s latest column – The Military/Security Plot Against Trump Is Real – summarizes the war against the president:

We are approaching something of a civil war where the capital city seeks the overthrow of the sovereign and its own restoration… That the objective of this city is to bring Trump down via a deep state-media coup is no secret.

Buchanan continues, arguing that Trump needs to take the offensive:

To prevail, Trump will have to campaign across this country and wage guerrilla war in this capital, using the legal and political weapons at his disposal to ferret out the enemies within his own government….

He should campaign against the real enemies of America First by promising to purge the deep state and flog its media collaborators.

Time to burn down the Bastille.

All true enough but, as usual, Pat, for all of his insights still someone rooted in the system itself, misses the point that to be able to have any chance of having a real impact within the system, there needs a powerful movement outside of it.

Focusing popular mobilization on elections every four years and then sending everyone home in between does little in itself to build such a movement and, when mere electoralism fails in the face of the unified hostility of the elites, de-mobilization and passivity often follow – as the disastrous results of the recent French National Assembly elections show.  (See
Abstention rate “catastrophic” says Marine at GalliaWatch.)

Burning down the Bastille is a fine goal, but the question is: “who will do it?”

On the Left and “Fascism”

“…most of what calls itself “the left” in the West has been totally won over to the current form of imperialism – aka “globalization”. It is an imperialism of a new type, centered on the use of military force and “soft” power to enable transnational finance to penetrate every corner of the earth and thus to reshape all societies in the endless quest for profitable return on capital investment. The left has been won over to this new imperialism because it advances under the banner of “human rights” and “antiracism” – abstractions which a whole generation has been indoctrinated to consider the central, if not the only, political issues of our times.” – Diana Johnstone – The Main Issue in the French Election: National Sovereignty

The collapse of the virtually the entire left into at best a mere loyal opposition within the capitalist order becomes clearer every day. Its recent and nearly unanimous rallying in support of the system’s candidate for the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, is yet another sad example.

The notion that Marine Le Pen was ready to install a Hitlerian dictatorship on France is absurd on the face of it and in fairness most commentators on the left acknowledged this however grudgingly, – usually just before arguing that she was still, however, so dangerous (a “canny fascist“, for example) that the left must unite behind  the candidate of the transnational elites instead (1).

In fact, there are a few on the left who dissent from this groupthink.  In addition to Johnstone, for example, James Petras argued in Twenty Truths About Marine Le Pen

Macron’s pro-war, anti-working class and ‘supply-side’ economic policies leave us with only one conclusion: Marine Le Pen is the only candidate of the left. Her program and commitments are pro-labor, not ‘hard’ or ‘far’ right – and certainly not ‘fascist’….

Le Pen is above all a ‘sovereigntist’: ‘France First’. Her fight is against the Brussels oligarchs and for the restoration of sovereignty to the French people. There is an infinite irony in labeling the fight against imperial political power as ‘hard right’. It is insulting to debase popular demands for domestic democratic power over basic economic policies, fiscal spending, incomes and prices policies, budgets and deficits as ‘extremist and far right’.

Unfortunately, however, the Johnstones and Petras’s are rare and to the extent that their efforts have been noticed, they have generally been denounced(2).

What characterizes the bulk of the left today is its ahistorical (and decidedly un-Marxist) approach to the populist movements of the right.  The left insists on understanding these movements in terms of a social reality that existed almost 100 years ago and is particularly unable (or unwilling) to recognize that the class content of movements and discourses changes over time – reflecting both the circumstances of a particular conjuncture and the overall arc of capitalist development.

Until roughly World War II capitalist classes in each country were fundamentally national.  In the moments of extreme crisis faced by certain of these countries, a sector of the ruling class opted for alliances with mass movements of the right in order to crush insurgent workers’ movements of the left, overcome the impasse created by non-functional parliamentary systems and better assert themselves internationally against their foreign rivals.  Once their radical wings were domesticated, in certain countries the fascist movements of the ’20s and ’30s suited the needs of much of the ruling class – at least for a time.

Unlike the interwar years, however, today’s ruling class has largely transcended national boundaries and is fundamentally globalist.  It is fundamentally committed to the multiculturalist ideology that is the natural world view that accompanies this.  Its fundamental enemy is nationalism and rootedness is all its forms.

In the current period the opposition to the ruling order is again based a sector of the popular classes and the ruling class is again mobilizing to destroy this opposition.  The difference is that today it is the so-called “fascists” who represent authentic resistance and it is the “left” that is being mobilized to stamp it out in the service of big capital and its globalist project.

In an typical article, which appeared on the blog Shiraz Socialist The Front National and fascism the author quotes Leon Trotsky’s description of fascism as:

“… a plebeian movement in origin, directed and financed by big capitalist powers. It issued forth from the petty bourgeoisie, the slum proletariat and even to a certain extent, from the proletarian masses… with its leaders employing a great deal of socialist demagogy. This is necessary for the creation of the mass movement.”

Although this apparently did not occur to the author, one is struck by how much more accurately this describes today’s left than today’s national populist right.

More than anything else, the left needs to learn to look in the mirror…

(For more on these issues see my previous posts Trump as National Bourgeois and On the Left and 2016 – Part 2. and Part 1.)

(1) The examples are endless but see here and here for a couple of representative samples from Jacobin.
(2) Thus, for example, Johnstone’s fellow CounterPunch columnist Louis Proyect denounced “Diana Johnstone’s poisonous nativism” in an article on his blog last year. More recently Tendance Coatesy attacked both “the notorious” Johnstone and Petras for their comments on Le Pen.

Wishful Thinking?

Yes, I’m afraid so, but the article is still worth reading:

… the single possible alternative to the bourgeois world can only occur through the sacred union of reactionaries and progressives. A union of reactionaries, whether monarchists, Catholics, Hellenists, Muslims, but all attached to a certain classical order, with the progressives, all enemies of the bourgeois world, whether they come from the PCF of Marchais, today’s Worker’s Party, the Serbian resistance, or Venezuelan Chavismo. A union of reactionaries who are often right and progressives who have often been screwed over, against the liberals who dominate the world today and who have always divided in order to rule. Against this empire engaged headlong in the destruction of our human societies and nature. Against this world singularly devoted to the cult of Mammon and increasingly causing problems of overproduction, pollution, inequalities, which lead to catastrophe. – Alain Soral What Alternative to the Bourgeois World?

More on all of this is coming up soon…. I promise.

(Thanks to the Institute for National Revolutionary Studies for the translation of the 2007 speech which appeared on Soral’s website Egalite et Reconciliation.)

Meanwhile, Across the Ocean…

The divide is not between the left and right anymore but between patriots and globalistsMarine Le Pen

The news here at home has been so engaging that one (or at least this one) is tempted to ignore events nidroitenigauche1in the rest of the world. However, with the first round of the French presidential elections approaching, with hopes raised by Trump’s victory in the US and Brexit’s in the UK, with Marine Le Pen and the FN running stronger than ever, our attention inevitably turns to France.

It seems clear at this point that Marine will win the first round and will probably confront – and lose to – centrist candidate Emmanuel Macron in the second.  Still, hope springs eternal and there are frequent references to Trump’s improbable victory in discussions of the elections.  Thus, for example:

The counties that voted for Trump have the same sociological profiles as districts voting for Marine Le Pen — deindustrialized, rather lost, very socially vulnerable…. Paris and Lyon vote for the left, because they’re wealthy. Guys from Hayange vote for the far right, because they feel forgotten. The only one who’s taking up their cause is Marine Le Pen. – Stéphane Wahnich quoted in How Leftists Learned to Love Le Pen – Foreign Policy.

And if anything will allow Marine to repeat the Trump miracle, it will be outbreaks like the rioting which began early this month in the almost entirely immigrant banlieues (and which brought back memories of the massive disorders of 2005), although apparently some of the usual ultra-left types apparently got into the act as well. Combined with the memory of 2015 and 2016’s numerous Islamist terrorist attacks, such disorders will doubtlessly swell the ranks of FN supporters, just as the cycle of violence and disorder seen in this country in the years since Fergusson undoubtedly pushed some (probably significant) number of whites into the Trump camp.

(And, yes, it would be a bit cynical to say “worse is better,” but at least such events have the virtue of opening the eyes of some to things as they really are.)

Note:  In looking around the web for more on the rioting I came across an excellent blog – GalliaWatch – devoted to covering events in France. The author – Tiberge – seems to be a conservative Catholic who is generally (but not blindly) sympathetic to the FN.  I suspect that I will be relying on her a lot over the coming months for her invaluable coverage of French developments.