As the French presidential election nears, the Macron campaign is portraying itself as a "revolution":
At the same time, the media is promoting Macron non-stop:
This can mean only one of two things:
Which is it? Well, for one, Macron is a former Rothschild banker:
Macron is also supported by Manuel Valls, the former Prime Minister from the Socialist Party which Macron was a member of and served under:
Both of these political wings are part of the same, current political system...
and, really, two wings of the same ruling system...
...although each side is portrayed as the resistance to the other.
Perhaps that is the key to understand what is going on here, and what we really have to be aware of, is a matter of "thesis" and "anti-thesis" (Hegelian dialectic); if so, it is fair to say that perhaps the system's last "thesis" (socialism, i.e. the social-welfare globo-state), and its "anti-thesis" (conservatism, i.e. globo-banking corporate state) have each failed the people so many times and have had so many scandals attached to them that the system needs to capture the resistance to itself on both ends and develop a new anti-thesis for the people to fall into, formed from the same, original, two parties. And that is where Macron comes into play.
How can we test this theory?
Well, note how the increasingly unpopular representative of the current "anti-thesis" (globo-banking corporate state) attacked Macron for his ties to the current failing "thesis"(social-welfare globo-state). The caricature showed big-nosed Macron in business attire, surrounded by communist symbology and a list of Macron's connections to socialists. The Macron camp objected to the image, calling it "anti-Semitic":
To be fair, to be simultaneously linked to both socialism and finance, and portrayed with a big nose, was a Nazi-era, anti-Semitic trope used tocaricature Jews and suggest that they had a strategy of invoking power through finance and controlling the resistance against it.
But nobody in the Macron camp protested the caricature of a big-nosed Macron with rich business things representing "all things finance":
And nobody in the Macron camp had a problem with a caricature of a big-nosed Macron with business-elitist things representing finance, even when socialist symbology was added in (the iconic red star hat):
So where was the problem with the caricature that the Macron camp objected to?
Could it be that it did more than caricature Macron as a big-nosed finance guy tied to socialism and actually blew the cover that Macron is directly linked to specific individuals from the (globo-banking corporate state) "anti-thesis" and (social-welfare globo-state) "thesis", and therefore a phony opposition? What else could explain the discrepancy?
Could it be that the suggestion of a phony opposition blew the wind out of the Macron camp's sails because it hit too close to the truth?
After all, the (globo-banking corporate state) "anti-thesis" and (social-welfare globo-state) "thesis" - and Macron - all push for the same action plan in the European Parliament, European Council and especially the European Commission on key points such as immigration:
And it is easy to see why; after all, the project (and the forces of integration, through the open-borders social-welfare globo-state) could, in theory, create one culture of people who buy the same things, which helps the market. The forces behind the anti-thesis (globo-banking corporate state) love this:
At the same time, immigration as part of the social-welfare globo-state prevents the supply of labor from drying up, which, per economic theory, prevents corporations from having to pay out more to incentivize jobs that people do not really want. The forces behind the anti-thesis (globo-banking corporate state) love this..
On the other side of the coin, the importation of cheap labor, which appeases the globo-banking corporate state, introduces a needy population that is almost certain to vote in favor of socialist political parties, securing the socialist party's place in power. The forces behind the supposed thesis (social-welfare globo-state) love this.
The two arms of the status quo might be rolled together to form a bloated, multi-ethnic, corporate, labor-hungry state. A revolution against it might look like this:
But is this the fight Macron is leading?
I would argue Macron's position is more-closely depicted by the behemoth on the right: the same positions as the "thesis"(socialism, i.e. social-welfare globo-state) and "anti-thesis" (conservatism, i.e. globo-banking corporate state) rolled into one.
What do you think?
At the same time, the media is promoting Macron non-stop:
This can mean only one of two things:
- the media is turning against the system and supporting a revolutionary candidate like Macron
- the media is pushing Macron because he is a system candidate, and Macron's campaign is trying to convince the public that Macron is a revolutionary so the public votes for him
Which is it? Well, for one, Macron is a former Rothschild banker:
Macron is also supported by Manuel Valls, the former Prime Minister from the Socialist Party which Macron was a member of and served under:
Both of these political wings are part of the same, current political system...
and, really, two wings of the same ruling system...
...although each side is portrayed as the resistance to the other.
Perhaps that is the key to understand what is going on here, and what we really have to be aware of, is a matter of "thesis" and "anti-thesis" (Hegelian dialectic); if so, it is fair to say that perhaps the system's last "thesis" (socialism, i.e. the social-welfare globo-state), and its "anti-thesis" (conservatism, i.e. globo-banking corporate state) have each failed the people so many times and have had so many scandals attached to them that the system needs to capture the resistance to itself on both ends and develop a new anti-thesis for the people to fall into, formed from the same, original, two parties. And that is where Macron comes into play.
How can we test this theory?
Well, note how the increasingly unpopular representative of the current "anti-thesis" (globo-banking corporate state) attacked Macron for his ties to the current failing "thesis"(social-welfare globo-state). The caricature showed big-nosed Macron in business attire, surrounded by communist symbology and a list of Macron's connections to socialists. The Macron camp objected to the image, calling it "anti-Semitic":
To be fair, to be simultaneously linked to both socialism and finance, and portrayed with a big nose, was a Nazi-era, anti-Semitic trope used tocaricature Jews and suggest that they had a strategy of invoking power through finance and controlling the resistance against it.
But nobody in the Macron camp protested the caricature of a big-nosed Macron with rich business things representing "all things finance":
And nobody in the Macron camp had a problem with a caricature of a big-nosed Macron with business-elitist things representing finance, even when socialist symbology was added in (the iconic red star hat):
So where was the problem with the caricature that the Macron camp objected to?
Could it be that it did more than caricature Macron as a big-nosed finance guy tied to socialism and actually blew the cover that Macron is directly linked to specific individuals from the (globo-banking corporate state) "anti-thesis" and (social-welfare globo-state) "thesis", and therefore a phony opposition? What else could explain the discrepancy?
Could it be that the suggestion of a phony opposition blew the wind out of the Macron camp's sails because it hit too close to the truth?
After all, the (globo-banking corporate state) "anti-thesis" and (social-welfare globo-state) "thesis" - and Macron - all push for the same action plan in the European Parliament, European Council and especially the European Commission on key points such as immigration:
And it is easy to see why; after all, the project (and the forces of integration, through the open-borders social-welfare globo-state) could, in theory, create one culture of people who buy the same things, which helps the market. The forces behind the anti-thesis (globo-banking corporate state) love this:
At the same time, immigration as part of the social-welfare globo-state prevents the supply of labor from drying up, which, per economic theory, prevents corporations from having to pay out more to incentivize jobs that people do not really want. The forces behind the anti-thesis (globo-banking corporate state) love this..
On the other side of the coin, the importation of cheap labor, which appeases the globo-banking corporate state, introduces a needy population that is almost certain to vote in favor of socialist political parties, securing the socialist party's place in power. The forces behind the supposed thesis (social-welfare globo-state) love this.
The two arms of the status quo might be rolled together to form a bloated, multi-ethnic, corporate, labor-hungry state. A revolution against it might look like this:
But is this the fight Macron is leading?
I would argue Macron's position is more-closely depicted by the behemoth on the right: the same positions as the "thesis"(socialism, i.e. social-welfare globo-state) and "anti-thesis" (conservatism, i.e. globo-banking corporate state) rolled into one.
What do you think?
