French Identity, Muslim Population Dominate Election by William Horobin, Wall Street Journal
The race to become the next president of France is becoming a referendum on what it means to be French.
As voters prepare to head to the polls Sunday for the Républicains’ primary—which could ultimately determine the next president—the rhetoric at rallies and debates has increasingly focused on whether France’s secular values are compatible with its Muslim population—one of Europe’s biggest.
The election of Donald Trump has emboldened far-right presidential contender Marine Le Pen, who is campaigning against France’s socialists and conservatives on an anti-immigrant, antitrade platform similar to the U.S. president-elect’s. That message has helped keep her near the top of the polls after two years of blistering terror attacks carried out by foreign and French citizens, as well as a huge wave of migrants from the Middle East.
The cascade of events has left France’s political establishment at a crossroads: Reject Ms. Le Pen’s rhetoric or co-opt it…
Comments
If nearly all the populations of the world -- to include the populations of the Western World now -- are in rebellion against the constant and unending political, economic, social and/or value "you must sacrifice and change" demands of globalization/globalism/the global economy,
And if all of these such rebellious populations -- in one way or another and/or to one degree or another -- are utilizing, for example, the "politics of nostalgia" as a vehicle/a means/a method for pursuing these such, common to all of them, "revolt against the demands of globalization, etc." objectives,
Then how is it that we will still find it proper to send out our military forces to stand against those states and societies (Russia, China, Iran, etc.?) and those non-state entities also (AQ, ISIS, etc.?) -- who, like the U.S./the West now -- are organizing themselves, and acting, so as to pursue these such similar rebellious/nostalgic goals?
This being the fundamental question that the Brexit, Trump and Le Pen now brings before us?
A question that, accordingly, we must -- sometime soon -- address, come to terms and deal with?
We must understand that -- not only the foreign policies of the Western nations but their domestic policies also -- have, for decades now, been focused on transforming ALL the states and societies of the world (to include those within the West) such that ALL these states and societies might better provide for the wants, needs and desires of globalization/globalism/the global economy.
This being the case, then should we be surprised that we are now witnessing -- both here at home (to wit: in the Western World) and abroad (to wit: in the non-Western World also) -- a common revolt against these such radical, constant and unending political, economic, social and/or value "sacrifice and change" demands associated with globalization/globalism/the global economy?
In this "common cause" light (common in the sense of a common revolt against the significantly intolerable political, economic, social and/or value "sacrifice and change" demands of globalization, etc.), to suggest that we now find ourselves in something of a dilemma; explained as follows:
a. If it is alright for the Western World to revolt against Western domestic policies -- which require radical, constant and unending political, economic, social and/or value "sacrifices and changes" -- so as to better provide for the wants, needs and desires of global economy, etc. (In this light to see the Brexit, Trump, Le Pen, etc.?)
b. Then why is is not alright for the non-Western World (think AQ, ISIS, Russia, etc., etc., etc.) to, likewise, revolt against Western -- in this case foreign policies -- which make these exact same (but even more intolerable given the foreign context) political, economic, social and/or value "sacrifice and change" demands?
Or should we understand "a" and "b" above simply within the context of "ALL enemies; foreign and domestic?"
Bottom Line Questions:
a. Given that the Western populations, much like many of the non-Western ones before them, are now actively rebelling against the political, economic, social and/or value demands of globalization, etc., are we not to see these such non-Western rebels -- now -- as our "brothers and sisters"/our "brothers and sisters-in-arms-and/or-in rebellion?"
b. Or should we see these Western rebels, much like we see the non-Western ones, as our enemy?
An interesting dilemma indeed?
(Note: Hillary Clinton is seen as running on: "Globalization First." Trump, the Brexit folks, Le Pen, Putin, the Islamists, etc., etc., etc., are seen as running on: "My Country/My Race/My Ethnicity/My Tribe/My Civilization/My Religion/My Sect, etc., First.")