Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 141
Greg Johnson Interviews Patrick Le Brun on Le Pen & Trump

2 comments

1. Joseph Claus says:

   December 15, 2015 at 6:34 pm

   It was great to listen to a commentary on the FN that doesn’t devolve into accusing Le Pen of being some sort of crypto-Jew. People who say “No enemies on the Right” need to take into account that people in the mainstream have to speak and act in a certain way, even if they sympathize or share common ground with the alt right or White Nationalism.

   The need for a nationalist student group on Campus is clear, and should be discussed more in the alt-right. I think White Students unions, while a good troll, are a poor vehicle for real campus activism. Youth for Western civilization should be resurrected (or at the very least be the model). A nationalist student group needs to be open to members of the mainstream right, and be able to maintain plausible deniability when called racist. The idea for a Students for Trump group is a good start, but we need something more permanent for when Trump’s campaign fizzles out. In the meantime I would suggest that any students reading this should get involved with conservative groups on campus. You would be surprised at what even the most “Blue-pilled” conservative will admit to after everyone has had a few drinks.

   0

   0
2. Theodore says:

   December 15, 2015 at 8:10 pm

   This is yet another in the series of excellent and informative Johnson-Le Brun podcasts.

   The ending idea is excellent, and the overarching strategy is essential: whatever Trump really is, and whatever he achieves or does not achieve, he has acted as Greg says as an “icebreaker” – breaking the status quo of American politics. It is absolutely essential that the angry and motivated elements of the Trump base be given some direction when the inevitable betrayal by the Establishment occurs. If the “movement” allows these enraged Trumpites to just fade away, then the “movement” is as degenerate as I’ve been claiming.

   Now, my extreme skepticism about Marine Le Pen, the current FN, and “mainstreaming” is well known by those who read my blog(s). I’ll say this: the proof of the pudding is what is going to happen in 2017. Le Brun has emphasized the importance of that election. The whole point of mainstreaming is to achieve power and then hopefully use that power to do some good.

   If Marine is unable to break through, if 2017 ends up being the same result as 2015, then it was all for naught. How then is the FN and its strategy any better than the radical Golden Dawn (which Marine unnecessarily and despicably denounced)? A FN loss would leave the FN in exactly the same boat as GD – a popular nationalist party reviled by elites that cannot generate enough support to gain power. Thus, the ONLY justification for mainstreaming would be a 2017 FN victory AND the use of that victory to actualize long-term significant changes favorable to French demographics. Civic nationalism won’t cut it as an outcome (even if she wins).

   To make matters worse, if we follow Le Brun’s assertion that a FN loss in 2017 leaves “taking to the streets” as the only option, then mainstreaming is a double fail – because a mainstreamed, center-shifting FN is hardly the vehicle to lead any sort of national revolution, and Marine Le Pen is hardly the person to wave the flag of rebellion,

   It seems to me that mainstreaming puts all of the FN’s eggs in the electoral basket. If they can’t break through to power, then the leadership of French nationalism must pass into more radical hands.

   As far as the FN “old guard” goes, I won’t even mention the spectacle of a “more radical” French nationalist leader married to an Asiatrix.

   0

   0

Comments are closed.