* All politics is tribal. “Right” and “left” have no meaning beyond their effect on various tribes’ fortunes. Communism, libertarianism, liberalism, democratism claim to be universalist, but self-professed universalists are often the biggest tribalists of all.
* The Left / Right dichotomy is useless. While plenty of her policies are right wing, if anything, on the whole, Marine Le Pen is more left wing. For example:
• She is against free trade.
• She is for a larger welfare state.
• She is against paying interest on state loans and wants the Bank of France to “loan” to the state at 0% interest (this is a fancy way of calling to print money).
• She is strongly Keynesian and only calls for using gold as part of a plan to try to establish dollar-free international trade (Keynes’ Bancor).
• She is strongly anti-American.
• She is against America’s military crusades in the Middle East.
• She wants to impose border tariffs and use the money to raise the minimum wage.
• She detests multi-nationals and instead supports the petit-bourgeois small shop owners.
• She hates Wall Street and big banks. She wants to nationalize French banks.
• She is against immigration (Cesar Chavez, Walter Mondale, Ralph Abernathy leftism).
In short she wants to take an increasingly global and feral capitalism and harness it to the yoke of national sovereignty in order to re-domesticate it.
The real split is between globalists and nationalists. In this case Mitt Romney, Rand Paul, David Cameron, Nigel Farage, Ed Koch, Adolf Hitler and Richard Nixon are/were all globalists (Farage may change his globalist ways but hasn’t so far). Hitler for example brought in slave immigrants to work in German factories. He tried to set up a globalist system with himself in charge of it.
Examples of recent nationalists that are similar to Le Pen (nationalist, socialist, and secular) would be Saddam Hussein, Mouammar Kadhafi, and Bachar el-Assad. See a trend there?
Since American sees herself as now ruling the globe; elite America’s “nationalism” is now globalism.
* I have had these thoughts about assimilation of an immigrant group into the original residents. It is entirely sexual. The speed of absorption is a function of the sexual attractiveness of both genders of the immigrant group, but the female is more important than the male. If the female of the immigrant group is unattractive to the males of the original group, or if the immigrant group can constrain its females over generations from selecting and mating with the males of the original group, then the immigrant will remain as a racially distinct group.
When I was a boy in the late 60s and early 70s and I watched college football, the Big 10 teams all had large numbers of players named Wojohowitsz or Obramowitz. Less than 50 years later, these names have practically disappeared from public note. Much the same could even be said for Italian names. You almost never see classic Italian names in the public record. The Poles were absorbed very quickly as the blond, attractive, eastern European Polish girls were quickly snatched up by white American men. Texas is another example of this. Central Texas was first settled by Germans and Bohemians. When I was a boy there were still Kocureks and many other “Bohunk” names. Not so much any more, even the Schultzs and Schmidts, and now getting sucked into the melting pot that is Texas.
Take the opposite. African Americans. It has been noted that Whites are pretty much about 99 point something percent European and blacks run something from 40 to 90 something percent African. And much of the “whiteness” in blacks has really been something more recent as more interracial relationships, largely between white women and black men, have occurred. Black women remain of no interest to white males. Thus with each generation, at least 50% of blacks born in the US have no sexual value, at least no reproductive value, to others outside of that racial group.
Consider American Indians. Immediately, given the completely male dominated nature of “settlement”, female American Indians “hooked up” with European males. And across each generation, the most attractive females, packed up, hooked up, with some European stock male. When you close your eyes, and think of “reservation” life, it is predominately male, those lower, less attractive, less intelligent, less capable males, that comprise the bulk of the indigenous population. The women leave those males behind.
American females, are nothing, if they are not hypergamistic. It is the screech of the Manosphere about how “conditional”, how “mercenary”, how entitled, how “rent seeking”, that American females truly are. But frankly, I think they are far less than there counterparts found in other parts of the globe. Try Colombian women if you want to encounter “rent seeking”. They are quite up front with there demand for “cash and prizes” from the men they allow to have access to them.
And those men “left behind” can end up quite radical, quite angry about their exclusion. If the most attractive women of their group are bailing on them for other males, and the females of the “original” group rebuke and reject immigrant males, they will be quite angry. The manosphere exists exactly because the “sex ratio” due to declining birthrate has created so few reproductive age women relative to the far greater number of “competitive” males. Those males are spread out across a far greater range of ages, each year with more males born than the previous. It is nothing to see 4 to 1 ratios, or greater, when you consider obesity, race, and the “pecking order” of female racial desirability: White, Asian, Latina, Black. And the rest of femcentric American society looks at these man as “loserterians”, bitter as they are left behind.
Inevitably, Europe will have issues with Muslim males. It was noted above that “Immigration was not the issue in the Charlie attacks because the attackers were born in France.” It has been noted that many of these “lone wolf” sorts of attacks are males that are “delinquents”, that the jailyard is the schoolyard of Jahidis. These men are from the bottom of “pecking order” of the sexual totem. European women reject them for their race, their religion, and mostly, their poverty. And it pisses them off. The essence of Islam, more than any other aspect of the religion, and really any of the three monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is constraint of the “feral” nature of female sexuality, “the civilization of love”. Islam seeks in its customs and laws, the lessen the hypergamy of females, and to constrain them in marriage.
Those “moderate” Muslims, the ones that may get sucked into the “melting pot” of western cultures, that ones that might accede to European rule of law, are those that have “skin in the game”: Those males that have “fortunate” enough to have a wife, kids. But even into the second generation, the pull on the females of that group, especially in a western environment of declining birthrate, is for the “girls” to run if they have to, and get selected if possible by the racially more favorable, and definitely the socially and economically more profitable European males, if they can. And in this sexual environment today, merely being “thinnish”, not particularly ugly, and having a Vagina, is all that is necessary for Asian women to “get in the game”. French boys will mate with those girls and the very hard nature of today’s sexual market, combined with the “beta” producing factory that is modern culture, will cause French white beta males to jump at the chance for sexual access and will marry to ensure that access is hopefully permanent. There a multitudes of stories about the horrors of “honor killings” or Muslim families repressing daughters in order to keep the girl in the fold and restricting her hypergamy.
And this will leave behind, an embittered, angry, excluded group of males in a lower racial caste, a lower economic caste, men who revert back to core Islamic values that designed to keep Islamic females in check, lessen their hypergamy, early family assigned marriage, early childbirth, low education, fewer options.
These attacks have more to do with sexual access than religion.