The Child King

In 2017, Macron wanted to be a unifier, an illusory approach closer to pragmatism than a desire to unite and pacify. His newly constituted political party, “En Marche”, while it had taken Jacques Chirac’s RPR in 1976 years to take off and win the legislative elections of 1986, became unavoidable in a few months and gave him victory in the presidential elections.

Macron was never elected by the people. No mandate of mayor, deputy, or even senator. This probably partly explains his distanced position with regard to the French as well as a more than monarchical behavior.

Economist and banker above all, he joined the Socialists and became Minister of Finance, under the presidency of François Hollande. A highly strategic position that allowed him to be at the forefront of a government and a moribund policy that no one wanted.

During his 2017 presidential campaign, his image as a young leader with an ambitious profile, like a Rastignac pacing the corridors of power with unprecedented casualness and arrogance contrasted with the awkwardness and unappealing physical aspect of François Hollande.

At thirty-nine, Macron would go on to become the youngest president ever, sending JFK back to the Tussaud Museum.

The young electorate and the French, as well as the political microcosm, very quickly saw in him a candidate assimilated to renewal, even more to a new era which would bring France out of its torpor and plunge it head-on into the modernity of a third millennium that the nation had not really seen the birth of. Macron embodied hope, ambition, and modernity, to the point of seeing him, beyond the presidency, become the undisputed leader of the European Union, going so far as to dismiss Angela Merkel from the leadership.

With Macron, France was going to shine again, and once again become the beacon of the old continent, if not of the world.

Admittedly, Sarkozy had dusted off Marianne, but with great verbal blows, provocations and scandals which did not return it, in spite of an exceptional dynamism in no way popular. He very quickly became, in the eyes of the French, the very image of the upstart with a stormy past and the reflection of a political image that had yellowed over time. Macron was unknown to the general public, young and without a past. He embodied the future.

Once elected, the image of the unifier will begin to tarnish and soon the dashing candidate will show his true face, that of authority, contempt, and intransigence.

The demands of the yellow vests will reveal the real intentions of Macron, who will respond to them with disproportionate violence, thus marking his policy, the policy from which he will not derogate. A policy serving the interests of the rich, making Sarkozy an altar boy.

Those who joined him in 2017 were dismissed from the high ranking of power or left on their own, leaving the field open to a horde of young wolves who were just waiting at the edge of the woods for this moment to join their undisputed master. A gang of technocrats who were going to dynamite the old political guard and infiltrate, like ” The night of the long knives”, all the cogs of power. A political “St Bartholomew´s Day Massacre”, a French-style Trojan horse, made in the third millennium.

In five years, better than François Mitterrand, who stoned the Communist Party in the early 80s, Macron will succeed in rolling the UMP of Sarkozy, the Centrists of the Modem and the Socialist Party that he belonged to. His reign is absolute and his conquest worthy of those of Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar, to such an extent that he will be nicknamed Jupiter and The Sun King, supplanting the Mitterrandian Sphinx.

He managed to implode the Republican front and brought out the far left and far right political parties. Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Le Pen thus found themselves on the ropes, stamped as left and right extremists by an autocratic Jupiterian policy that has taken democracy hostage and left parliamentarianism fallow. Paradox and paroxysm, the more autocracy imposes itself as such, the more the populist and extremist electorate rise in the polls until seeing the emergence of Eric Zemmour, even more to the right of Marine Le Pen, who does not wish to let herself be locked in this role of a fascist, and who on the contrary, does everything to impose herself as an alternative to this Macronian autocracy and to the extremes to become the candidate of the people.

While Zemmour and Mélenchon tear each other apart on the migration issue, Marine Le Pen moves away from it, knowing that these controversies only serve Macron who has done everything to set France on fire, and that, as a white knight, will come to rescue the French victims of a growing xenophobia or of a wokism that he created from scratch, leaving respectively and skilfully Zemmour and Mélanchon, to be the spokespersons of these streams.

The government blows hot and cold by making these diversions a trump card, allowing it to establish a program intrinsically linked to the WEF which only aims to enslave the French. The erotica-literary rantings of Bruno Le Maire, the Minister of the Economy, the bare first pages of a sassy Marlene Schiappa, Secretary of State in charge of Equality between women and men, and the fight against discrimination, as well as that the wokist provocations of Pap NDiaye, the Minister of National Education, only serve as a smokescreen while adding fuel to the fire, so that France continues to burn from within.

The more divided France is, the stronger Macron is, and the stronger he is, the more he can serve the interests of the WEF.

Mitterrand was compared to Machiavelli, Macron, in his youthful appearance lost in a world too big for him, took on the features of Mammon. His apparent disbelief and his ingenuity in ecstatic over a children’s menu in a canteen, during an impromptu visit, clash cruelly with the political brutality he demonstrates every day.

In less than four years, Macron will leave with the consciousness of duty accomplished. What will remain of France? This is the question that those who elected him will have to ask themselves. He will have only done his duty and, like his predecessors, will have done everything to be the first in line. Unlike them, it is not certain that his objectives are the same. His duality of politician and technocrat makes him an ambivalent and ambiguous character, if not equivocal, knowing that the thirst for power was not and perhaps is not what made him what he is. A president who will have played with politics, like a child would play with a disjointed doll.A child-like president who will have thus played with it to better possess it, better conceal it even more, so that it implodes and disappears forever to make way for a depoliticized, sanitized power.

Like this article?