Gilets jaunes, tools of Globalists?

For everyone, the revolt in France is from the people for the people. Tired of Globalism, they have suddenly risen against their dictator Emmanuel Macron in the name of freedom and sovereignty.

The French essayist Alain Soral summarized the revolt in Lenin’s terms “a revolution can only happen when the middle class and proletarians unite in a common economic interest against the ruling class”. The former French presidential candidate Marine Lepen rejoices at the idea of destitution of Macron; she would most likely be the next president!

Yet, let’s take a more rational approach.

It has been a long time our governments have just been facades. Replacing one by another doesn’t necessarily change anything, at all. For example, still in France, the historian Marion Sigaut, made a substantial contribution to bring light on the French revolution. And her conclusion is sharp: the French revolution against the king was a revolution from the bourgeoisie (rich merchants) against the aristocracy; it was never about the people.

Historically, the battle for the power always existed. The rich always wanted to own the State to make more profits. And France is no exception to this rule. In fact, it is the merchants who pushed the idea of liberalism. The free pass which could allow them to replace moral values by the market. This is also the time when the idea of human rights and the myth of the noble savage became popular.

But let me be straight: the objective of liberalism is not to make people free, but to take them away from the truth and divide them. Its foundation is to make people believe that truth is a point of view and that everything – from an ideological perspective – is equal and good.

As such, economic liberalism won’t acknowledge identity politics in shaping of the economic landscape (i.e. an Indian in the UK will never do his best to hire another Indian, or outsource to India, even if it is less profitable). Social liberalism won’t acknowledge differences between men and women. Spiritual liberalism won’t acknowledge one truth among religions, and in fine leads to agnosticism or atheism (e.g. science never proved that God exists, Buddhism is better than Christianity). Finally, moral liberalism doesn’t provide a clear definition of good and Evil (i.e. moral relativity, as described in Thinking fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman, Jewish).

In order to introduce liberalism to the people, it is first required to take care of two things:

1) the destitution of the ruling class;

2) the destruction of the influence of the Church.

The destitution of the ruling class

In 1789, in France, most people wanted the king to rule the country, and the armies were in fact corrupted by the bourgeoisie to manufacture a revolution. This idea – of course – is not predominant among scholars, since it clearly underpins the liberal agenda.

To seize the power in a State always requires the same steps: 1) divide the citizens using concepts such as social and economic classes, political views and leaders, race and ethnicity, sex and family, etc., 2) grow tensions between communities using mass-media and political agents (e.g. fund or close the eyes on criminality, finance or import terrorists), 3) push the country to revolt 4) take a position of saviour among the victims, and build a fake opposition to the regime.

Unsurprisingly, Ukraine, Syria, Tunisia, Lebanon, Soviet Russia all followed these steps. And most likely France as well today.

The primary objective in all revolution is to place one’s party agents at the right place at the right time. Why? Because you get the people on your side, and in these emotional times, people want to dream. Their trust is broken and any apparent insider with leader’s qualities is capable of seizing the opportunity. It is in time of despair that people can be the most easily deceived.

So, in a nutshell, the current situation in France will provide all the necessary tools for pushing a fake opposition to power and ask for more from the people.

The destruction of the influence of the Church

The Church historically always had two roles: maintain unity of the people in the country and be the guardian of moral standards.

In a country where the Church works with the State and is officially recognized as such, it unites all the people – rich or poor – under one same ruler (God). Since Biblical texts are rather explicit, and can’t change, there can’t be any Marxist propaganda to divide the people and foster a revolution. In fact, the only revolt can oppose good and evil, once again in the frame of morality defined by the Church.

Indeed, the Bible is a book given by God. Its content is fixed and the morality is clearly defined. Breaking Christianity hence enable Globalists to introduce a new one, based on materialism (i.e. The love of what is physically accessible to our senses). Let’s cite:

  • Sex, adultery, porn, prostitution and even pedophilia
  • Money, consumption
  • Individualism, power
  • Feminism, divorce
  • Mass immigration
  • Drinking, drugs, alcoholism
  • Etc.

All these elements are related to very precise Christian sins. Hence, in a Christian society, they are all forbidden. Economy is not the priority, sin is!

Conclusion

As you see, the division of the people and the breaking of the Church are complementary to control the people. The goal is to divide them and lure them into a material approach of life far away from the real battle that is between good and evil (them).

To me, it is obvious that the yellow vests have no metaphysical demands. Not a single yellow jacket is walking for God. Not a single one wants more moral values. Foremost, their main preoccupation is the amount of beer they can buy, TV show or football game, and/or holiday destination. Don’t believe me? French spend in average 3h42 in front of their TV on a daily basis.

These yellow vests want to consume and they naively still assume that democracy is the right to ask from leaders to pay less taxes and get more. They also believe that democracy is the right to choose your leaders. What a misunderstanding of the influence of education and media on people’s decision making. Hence, I see this movement as naive.

This being said, their economic claims are superficially sound and justified. But focusing on the material world is exactly the game of the Globalists. Without even knowing it, this movement serves Globalists, thus the father of lies.

The foundation of France is to take back to Clovis and Jeanne d’Arc who both submitted to the authority of God through the son Jesus Christ. Both acknowledged in the name of God the kingdom of France. Democracy is a concept that has no sense where the ruler is good and caring for his people. In fact, a good ruler is less corruptible than the masses. Democracy is – factually – easier to corrupt than a Kingdom.

Hence, if you understand the dispute above, there can be no true revolution nor counter-revolution if you limit it to materialism and relative morality. Let us not forget this is a long-going war for good against evil, and the devil is the prince of relative morality and materialism, which means he must be encountered with the Truth for he is Lie. The one and only true battle to be fought is through God and the one true Messiah Jesus Christ. France is the elder daughter of the catholic church and has a divine mission for Christianity, which means the main goal of 1789’s revolution, from a satanic prospective, was to defile France to it’s very roots. French people have forgotten that. But hopefully some of them begin to remember.

The day crosses will replace jackets, the change will appear.

Towards an awakened France

After USA it is the turn to France to select the destiny of the western world in two turns: one on the 23th april, and the other one on the 7th may 2017.marine fillon.png

If France does not stand today and elect a decent president, we can expect the worse for the next 8 years, and more to come. But it seems we are not in USA, we don’t have a Trump… is there a single valid candidate, or just one better than another?

These elections oppose the UMP (leftists who believe not to be – the new liberal republicans), the PS (leftists and proud to be), and the Front National who represents the French national interests with a communist touch to certain extend. In a nutshell, France has no real right or conservative wing – normal for a country who authored the European Charter of rights stating all leftists values.

Today, one can have no doubts about the influence of American elections on the selection of the French candidates, with the sudden withdrawal of Nicolas Sarkozy  and the apparition of François Fillon . This candidate, politically correct, has some sort of right-wing programme, without the will, curriculum and balls to really do anything right… that is a big problem.

Even though Marine Lepen has been telling the same truth for years now, she is victim of a constant propaganda against her and her party – democracy you said! After Trump, taking the risk of getting Marine elected is too big. If she becomes president, this is end of the little game going on in the west, once for all. And for this, there is no chance! And for this, they use the usual labels “racist”, “sexist”, etc.

Image result for tous contre marine

The problem with François Fillon’s programme is that it is nothing but a pseudo list of minimal populist requirements to get elected. He seeks in getting all FN and most of PS electorates. After reading both Marine Lepen and François Fillon programmes, I wouldn’t say that Marine’s programme is better, but I have more confience in her to make things move forward. And here is why. Marine, in addition to François Fillon’s measures, wants to implement:

  • Restoration of death penalty
  • Restoration of public debt sovereignity through the financing from Bank of France
  • Substential increase of defense budget and staff, increase respect for veterans
  • Instauration of French made principle, produce locally
  • End of positive discrimination law
  • End of corruption in public and health care sector
  • Limit president mandate to one and 7 years
  • Setup a popular referendum in the constitution
  • Restore media independence

These measures would make a significant change in France for sure, and set it in the right direction. But this is not perfect, of course. Immigration policy could be softer and stronger at the same time, only selecting highly qualified and restricting access to some nationality. Social cares could be cut, hence targetting the ones taking advantage of it. She could target more lobbys and corruption like Trump does. And finally, she could promote more tax cut, and increased national defense budget. Marine is definitely not a right wing extremist, but rather a centrist, don’t you think so?

If Fillon wins, things will get worse. If Marine wins, things will change, and up to us to continue. So, ready for the change?