France: Are the scandals of the "Progressive Circus" premeditated?

In my editorial of 11 June (LINK), I began telling you about the 'Progressive Circus' to explain the passivity of the French people in the face of the incredible hypocrisy of their ruling elites. In particular, the Minister of Education promotes social mixing and LGBT ideologies among the children of others while not imposing them on his own children, educated in the most elitist public school in France.

As I explained in that article, the 'Progressive Circus' consists in chasing one scandal after another, with the scandals coming at great frequency. Everyone talks about the current scandal for three or four days, then moves on to the next one. It's a perpetual Progressive Circus. June in France was no exception to this rule. Within ten days, we were treated to two main scandals and their sub-scandals, sprinkled with mini-scandals.

The first of all, of course, was the stabbing attack by a Syrian on 4 small children aged 2 to 3 and 2 adults on 8 June. As usual, the media and people of good conscience began by urging people to reflect, to avoid mixing things up and to keep repeating that the perpetrator of the crimes was a legal resident, as if this were an extenuating circumstance. The Right, on the other hand, was outraged that the man hadn’t been removed from the French territory under the European Dublin Regulation. The centrists called for "reason", and demanded that all asylum seekers and migrants undergo a psychiatric examination and follow-up. But the truth is that the administration is far too overwhelmed by requests to apply European law, and there are not enough psychologists and psychiatrists in France to monitor all the migrants who enter France every year - especially as the organization of French psychiatric care continues to deteriorate. However, the public debate, as usual, has not gone this way. First of all, the left and all the progressives accused the right of being heartless, of disregarding the popular emotions and taking advantage of a single news item to impose its nauseating xenophobic ideas. As always, the message was to first heal our wounds before giving any real thought to immigration. In other words, we urgently need to wait for the next scandal to avoid talking about serious issues. That might make sense if this were the first incident of this type, or even the second or third, if not the tenth or twentieth or thirtieth, or even the hundredth, but we can't even count them anymore. And we still haven't learned any lesson. These sub-scandals did not stop at that ping-pong exchange, which is as habitual as it is tiresome for all French people. The Left felt the compelling need to attack the 24-year-old hero who stopped the massacre by making contact with the criminal to divert his attention to himself and enable the assailant to be neutralised. Henri (as this courageous young man is known) got off to a bad start by writing on Facebook following the attack: "Pray for the children, I'm fine". Then his case got worse when we learned that Henri was making a trip across France, from cathedral to cathedral, to raise awareness of our religious monuments via social networks. In April, he told Aleteia: "I've always enjoyed walking, and associating it with cathedrals is like making a great pilgrimage".  And finally, when the Left saw him wearing a T-shirt with a small French flag, they couldn't hold back any longer. In the "20 minutes" newspaper, an article by a militant left-wing journalist read: "With his past, his dark side and his possible baggage, the young man, with his well-honed, almost preachy discourse, used to work for the far-right newspaper 'L'homme nouveau'. He may well fall off his pedestal faster than he climbed on it". Libération, the newspaper of bourgeois Parisian Left, took the opportunity to attack France's only non-progressive media with an article whose very left-wing author was clearly drooling when he wrote it. The headline is: "Henri d'Arc, a hero at Bolloré [a French billionaire who has set up a small non-progressive media group]", and the opening lines read:

“On CNews [a news channel somewhat equivalent to Fox News], on Friday 9 June, the interview with the 24-year-old man who hunted down the Lake Annecy attacker was an opportunity for Pascal Praud [the channel's emblematic presenter and editorialist] to push hard on the path of transcendence. ‘The path of the cathedrals? I'm doing a nine-month tour of France's cathedrals. My aim is to help people discover these cathedrals, magnificent monuments built by our ancestors who were imbued with greatness. This is what can inspire us to do what's right, what's good and what's beautiful. These gratuitous masterpieces have something to pass on to us, and a beauty that should inspire us.’ On the set of the channel owned by the catho-tradi Bolloré, there was a sort of incredulous shudder, a breath of grace in the face of so much freshness and sincerity, something like 'it's too good to be true'. Seven centuries later, one could almost recognise the mistrust of Joan of Arc's interrogators in the face of the wiles of the Evil One: authentic saint? Impostor?”

During this scandal and its sub-scandals, a number of controversies arose, such as the fact that more and more young girls were wearing the abaya at school (an outfit worn by some Muslim women, consisting of a long dress covering the whole body and a veil). Then comes the second scandal and its sub-scandals: that of the "Marianne Fund". This was set up in April 2021, following the Islamist attack on Samuel Paty, a history and geography teacher who was stabbed to death and beheaded because he had shown two cartoons of Mohammed during a lesson on freedom of expression. As the young Muslim terrorist had apparently been "radicalised online", the Marianne Fund aims to "support those involved in the fight against radicalisation, particularly online". It has been launched by the highly publicised Secretary of State, Marlène Schiappa, an absolute fan of Emmanuel Macron who never stops giving lessons on progressivism. The sum of €2.5 million was allocated and divided between 17 associations. The left-wing media then discovered that an association that had received €300,000 from the Marianne fund had financed videos broadcasting "political content against left-wing opponents of Emmanuel Macron during the presidential and legislative campaigns". The association published 57 videos aimed at young people on YouTube. Most of those videos were funded with public money and targeted left-wing opponents of Emmanuel Macron. However, it is illegal to use public funds to influence the outcome of an election. Following those revelations, the National Financial Prosecutor's Office (Parquet national financier - PNF) opened a judicial investigation into suspected misappropriation of public funds under the management of the Marianne Fund. As a result, homes of several people implicated in the affair, including Mohamed Sifaoui, were searched on 13 June. Along with Ms Schiappa, Mr Sifaoui is the best-known player in this affair, and like her, he loves giving lessons to the whole world. According to initial reports, the investigation revealed that his association, which received 350,000 Euros, used this sum to pay him and another executive 120,000 Euros net. Part of that public subsidy also financed the rental of an office in the very chic avenue Montaigne in Paris and publications on social networks, the majority of which are said to have achieved no more than "50 views". The day after the search, on 14 June, the Senate's committee of enquiry into the Marianne fund against separatism heard Marlène Schiappa, whose defence was that she was a white dove with a bad entourage. Then, on 15 June, it was the turn of Mr Sifaoui, who was heard and who vehemently laid all the blame on Marlène Schiappa and her collaborators.

During that scandal, when we realised that the same people who are indignant that the Right had no heart when it comes to learning the lessons of the attacks were feasting on public funds dedicated to the memory of the victims of those attacks, another controversy emerged.

A video of an "artistic performance" featuring naked or nude "artists", dildos and a garden where sexual acts are performed with plants as an "introduction to ecosexuality", provoked strong reactions due to the presence of children. This "artistic movement" seeks "to unite with nature and express the affection for it through spiritual connections and sexual practices". Their website reads: "Petit manuel indocile d'introduction à l'écosexualité questions our relationship with the Living. A garden as a space for subverting established norms. A garden where we dance together in homage to dildos, subversive links between the public and the private, the intimate and the political. A garden where we fuck with plants and share herbal teas. A garden where you can awaken your body to the joys of ecosexual practice and thought". The "troupe of artists" responsible for this "performance" receives money from the French state and the city of Lyon, whose mayor is an ecologist. It was an elected member of the opposition, from the right-wing Les Républicains party, who revealed this video. Once again, a whole series of ping-pong exchanges took place between the Right and the Left, culminating in the news that the right-wing mayor of Sens, from the Les Républicains party (the same party as the right-wing member of parliament who denounced the video) was inviting ecosexual "performers" to perform in public on Friday 24 June 2023 on the occasion of Olympic Day "en route to the Games".

For our European friends living in the former Soviet bloc countries, all this seems hallucination and they are sorry that the people of the West can accept this "Progressive Circus". But you have to understand that this has taken hold little by little, over a long period of time. Forty years ago, when that circus began, there was a scandal of this type every 3 years. Everyone thought: "This is the scum of the modern world". Then, without anyone noticing, we went from every 3 years to every year, every 6 months, every month, up to several times a month. We have slowly but surely become accustomed to the unacceptable, or acquired resilience, as the progressives prefer to call it. We have gone from being a tolerant Christian society to a relativistic progressive society. But how can we do otherwise when we want to peacefully absorb tens of millions of men and women from other continents and civilisations? What we are observing is both the friction that has existed for hundreds of years between the Christian and Muslim worlds and the necessary deconstruction of the identities of the indigenous populations to allow the smooth acceptance of a large mass of foreign populations. It's not for nothing that the main thinkers on the Left and in the progressive world, who are in favour of immigration, have "refoundation" and "deconstruction" as their leitmotivs.

Everything that has made Europe great and rich must be systematically deconstructed – for example, freedom of expression must be censored by political correctness to prevent people from questioning the devastating effects of uncontrolled immigration. Consciously or unconsciously, everything is leading to the creation of a new, unmoored European, to the weakening of States and the deprivation of our identities. You only have to listen to President Macron, who constantly repeats that Europe, France, politics, democracy and so on need to be rebuilt. The ultimate goal of Mr Macron and the progressives may seem tempting: to make each and every one of us a man with unlimited rights. But to achieve this, we need to destroy family as well as religious and national solidarity – and this can only create a man without obligations, without faith, without identity. The worst thing is that, in the end, if we accept this, whether we are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, French, Polish or German, in this kind of world, we will be alone, isolated, deprived of any solidarity, at the mercy of the strongest.

While the scale of this social engineering is exceptional, there is nothing unusual about it. Throughout history, such development has emerged in all affluent societies. So, between premeditated intention and natural consequence, it's hard to say who's the chicken or the egg in the Progressive Circus. But, as Shakespeare said, "Though it be madness, yet there  is method in’t.”