Jean-Marie Le Pen won a spot in the French presidential run-off because he fought in Vietnam and also served with the French expeditionary force that invaded Egypt in collusion with the Israelis during the 1956 Suez War.

While Jean-Marie Le Pen was an uninvited guest in Alexandria, Ariel Sharon was a tank commander in Sinai.  Le Pen and Sharon were almost neighbors in Egypt in 1956.  Then they both returned to their respective nations where Le Pen now does not want to live with Algerians and Sharon does not want to live with Palestinians.

The fundamental question for the rest of the world, however, is Why is what's called racism in France called self-defense in Israel?

Remarks of Jean-Marie LE PEN, French Deputy to the European Parliament, Candidate for President of the Republic, Saint-Cloud, on the evening of April 21, 2002

French women and French men.

My beloved countrymen of France and overseas.

My first feeling is of gratitude toward those who came tonight to give birth to a great hope.

    First, to the voters of France and overseas who have given me the priceless gift of their confidence.

    To the mayors, who, against all pressures and intimidation, sponsored my candidacy.

    To the campaign workers, who answered injuries and violence with calmness, courage, dedication, faithfulness, even working without computers, and sometimes, even sacrificing their lives.

    To all the foreign friends of France in the world, and above all those of the Francophone countries, who count on the eternal independence of France.

    As there is no perfect joy, I would like to salute the memory of Rolande Birgy, who you know as the Blue Beret, a great member of the Resistance, a patriot who was awarded the Medal of Righteousness after the second world war, who died this morning as he was leaving the hospital to cast his vote.

    Have no fear.  Do not lose hope.

    The election of May 5th is an all-important event.  D not fear to dream, you little ones, without degrees, the excluded.  Do not allow yourselves to be boxed-in by old divisions of left and right.  You, who have for 20 years endured all the mistakes and embezzlements of politicians.  You miners and metal workers, laborers in all these industries ruined by the Europeanism of the Maastricht Treaty.  You, farmers pensioned into destitution and sinking into ruin and disappearance.  You, who are the first victims of insecurity, in the suburbs, the cities and the villages.

    I call upon the French people, whatever their race, their religion or their social status, to rally to this historical chance for national rectification.

    Know that, as a man of the people, I will always be on the side of those who suffer, because I have known cold, hunger, and poverty.  I want to restore the cohesion of our great French people, the unity of the Republic, the independence of of France, our homeland, to reestablish security in the whole nation and free our countrymen from taxation and bureaucracy.

    A fraternal greeting to all my French countrymen, whether they abstained or whether they voted for other candidates.  I call on them not to allow themselves to be manipulated by the old tricks of politicians who would like to keep their little deal.

    I am socially on the Left, economically on the Right, and more than ever, a French nationalist.

    But above all, I am a free man, a patriot with but one ambition: France and the French people.

    I call on you to return to French brotherhood on the Place and Avenue of the Opera on the 1st of May, on the Holiday of Joan of Arc and the workers of France, to prepare together the second stage of the French Renaissance, the second round of the presidential election.

 Speech of Jean-Marie LE PEN, French Deputy to the European Parliament, Candidate for President of the Republic, Thematic Conference in Paris, Sunday, January 27, 2002

Immigration and Sovereignty

    I salute the professionalism and seriousness of the participants of this conference who have pointed out the importance of this subject and the direct consequences that it places before the entire planet.

    Immigration is a taboo subject in France.  It is seen in a bad light, simultaneously prosecuted and convicted in a free and democratic debate.  An unintelligibility duly arranged hanging over the numbers and composition of immigration.  The fatal accusation of racism and xenophobia hanging over the heads of those few politicians or investigators who mean to study the phenomenon and pass judgment.  Curiosity, the engine of science, is deemed hateful.  The dogmas of political correctness are tyrannically imposed on this subject, as on many others.  It is for that reason that Chirac and Jospin, following the lead of Juppe, have tarred us with the official brush.

    But the phenomenon by its extent and growth threatens the stability and peace of the world, but it threatens first and foremost the national interests of our people, and even its survival.

    The immigration started by the Chirac clique in 1974, the opening and then removal of our borders and customs control, the offering of attractive social benefits, turned it into a flood, then a cataclysm.

    It threatens us with submersion and submission, indeed disappearance.  Already it engenders serious pathological phenomena in society: insecurity, unemployment, and taxation.

    Alas civilizations, mortal and of different sizes, obey the rhythms of the universe with what seems to be an astounding similarity.

    Let us study the 5,000 years that separate us from scripture, what has been the fate of civilizations of the Indus River valley, of Egypt, of Mesopotamia, then of Athens and of Rome in the west and China in the east?

    This evolution, birth, growth, life and death all have a common trait raised by scholars, Toynbee as well as Oswald Spengler or Bruyas and Depaquier, which ends in foreign demographic submersion, which happens when allogenic elements become too numerous to be assimilated and when they allow their own vitality to weaken.

    That which one has called the history of great invasions, which has materialized this death of a civilization, is that which is coming to life in our time, here and now.

    It is dependent, certainly, on the will and lucidity of those in charge to fight against this risk or to submit to it.  It is this dilemma which separates us from the political left and right and until now, and without a doubt in the future, has abetted the foreign invasion as much by its national Malthusian politics as by its European utopianism, free trade and globalization.

    Immigration is a difficult subject because it crystalizes opinions and has fallen victim to an ugly row which has been instrumentalized by the left into a racism/anti-racism opposition permeating the depths of the electoral system.  It is the left which is responsible for the manipulation of these feelings, because it has not wanted to consider immigration as a fundamental subject around which all the other economic, social or political problems arrange themselves.  The right has submitted to this dictate without reacting and often with complicity.

    Immigration is a given in the history of humanity.  The French political class has decided to dodge the debate to not, it seems, offend the consciousness and oppose the thought police.  As Thierry Desjardin wrote a little while ago, "If Jean-Marie Le Pen said that he liked Mozart, Mozart would be completely banned." 

    Yet, one must still freely discuss such a subject.    That which we are trying to sell on the politics of immigration is simply respect for the principles of reciprocity, of justice and of equality.  It is because we consider that France is in danger that we propose a realistic plan to solve the problem of immigration.

    We do not want to be responsible for the social and ethnic explosion which, sooner or later, will be produced in out country.  It is from this point of view that it is necessary to reconsider the problem of immigration as a fundamental question and not as an intellectual and moral rupture.  It is necessary to dispassionately debate and freely discuss its causes and consequences.

    In this context. to speak of national preference is not a racist act.  On the contrary, it proves our solidarity with the community of nations.  It is natural and legitimate to protect one's own society before becoming interested in other communities, even if it is necessary to remain attentive to the misery of others.  The National Front defends all nations, whatever their origins, their races or their skin color.  In the Republic, the French citizenry is an essential component.  It is not we who say it, but the text of the constitution of the French Republic.

    To better understand the problem and propose solutions, let's summarily agree to a brief historical fresco of what has been the immigratory phenomenon in France.

            I. Immigration is the fundamental problem facing France

            Some historical reminders.

    According to the work done since the 19th century by different historians and linguists, the French population was largely formed at the beginning of the first Millenium.  The great invasions did not fundamentally overwhelm the population of Gaul.  According to Jacques Dupaquier, the great demographic historian, it seems that quantitatively, the German invaders represented but 5% of the population in the north of France, and 1% - 2% of the population in the south, which is not comparable to the immigration of people that we know about today.

    Besides, from the cultural point of view, the German tribes were of indo-European stock and were quickly converted to the catholic religion.  They were thereby united with the Christian Celts, which is a second difference with the contemporary situation, since one sees how little the Muslims settled in Europe convert themselves to the Catholic religion.

    For a long time, France has remained "an assemblage of dissimilar, divided populations", to take up again the established expression.  For centuries it has been necessary to forge a French unity, in common battles, in attachment to the crown, in the French Revolution and then in the empire.

    France has been more conquered than conqueror. No outstanding invasion puts its mark on the history of the period.  On the contrary, it is France which casts itself beyond its continental limits, by the progressive constitution of a colonial empire.

    After the blood letting of the Great War France experienced a wave of immigration.  Some clashes at the beginning were immeasurably magnified by the "immigrationist" historians, to make commonplace contemporary difficulties: it concerns, for example, the attacks of Italians over the course of 30 years.  At that time, the entire political class, and even a union like the CGT (Workers/Communists) found it normal to pass a law for national preference (1932, Roger Salengro), notably in employment.

    The next wave of immigration, which began at the beginning of the 1950's, is once more a European wave: Italian, Spanish, then Portugese.  It corresponded at the same time with the will of French businesses to do away with extra labor costs and with the desire of those interested to escape unemployment in their country of origin.  It is an provisional immigration in the sense that it disappeared gradually, as the foreigners asked for French nationality and merged into the human and cultural landscape of France, either returning to their nation of origin to participate in its economic development or to retire there.

    Over the course of 60 years, a new immigration appeared, essentially non-European and completely problematic by reason of its massive and unassimilable character.  One of the most frequent reproaches made against France to justify that it should today support the burden of immigration is that it has a moral debt to the Third Word due to the fact of colonization.  Once again, this charge is made by ignoramuses or traitors who urge the immigrants to denigrate France.  The example of Algeria is significant as the crude scene shown on the stage of France.

    One can estimate that the recent population of foreign origin is in the year 2000 on the order of 8 million, of which 4 million are Africans and Turks, almost all Muslims, for a global French population of 58.5 million.  Assimilation is no longer possible because it is the welcoming culture at risk of being assimilated.  One should well remember the prophesy of Jean Raspail in his famous work, "The Party of Saints."

    Even more, the famous phrase of Boumedienne [Algerian President] resonates daily like an oracle, "The time is coming when the starving masses of the South are going to mount an attack on the North.  And this immigration will be neither peaceful, nor fraternal."  

    Through these reports of demographic forces, it is evident that the breaking, uncontrolled waves of global immigration seriously mortgages the future of France.

France is threatened in its cultural continuity.

    Mass immigration poses a problem of cultural identity, a problem of social equilibrium, and a problem of territorial sovereignty.

    As Patrice de Plunkett has written, who is not of our parish, "France is not a culture among others, not even a combination of cultures: France exists because it is a civilization.  A civilization is not a culture, it is infinitely more: it is a social and moral architecture, the common home of generations which built it, vast and solid, to the end of time.  Such a house can accommodate immigrants, if they like the walls and the style of the life that is led there..."

    Immigration today puts at issue in particular our conception of the Republic (multiculturalism versus unity), our conception of school (Islamic headscarf versus secularism), our conception of the family (polygamy versus monogamy) and our conception of the woman (excision versus respect for women.)

Delinquency is tied to immigration.

    Equally, immigration presents a problem of social equilibrium, of concern to each Frenchman, by means of rising delinquency and inter-ethnic violence.  The recent violence that has taken the Jewish community as its target is the worst expression of this policy.  By allowing uncontrolled immigration, one also allows their conflicts on our soil.

    Foreigners, who officially represent only 7% of the population, represent 31% of the prison population.  If the bi-nationals are added to it, the number reaches 60%.

    Interethnic violence whether born of spontaneous rallies or organized by strong allogenic groups in certain urban ghettos: the police dare not enter (172 forbidden districts in 1999 compared to 67 in 1993).  1100 districts are under surveillance in 1998, classed from 1 to 6, according to the level of violence which prevails there.  These are the districts with a strong immigrant population.  The situation seems worrying to our nation as revealed by the latest available statistics on the subject.

The economic sclerosis

    From the economic point of view, the social allowances which the legal immigrants automatically receive on arriving in France constitutes a sucking pump for Third World populations. All this us a cost borne by the French economy.  Maurie Allais, Nobel prize winner in economics, estimates that infrastructure costs of each legal immigrant amounts to four year's salary, and twenty years if he comes with wife and children.  The difference between what they receive and what they pay in taxes and contributions raises the price to 300 billions Francs. ($60 billion).  As called attention to by Jacques Dupaquier: "If Europe receives too many non-qualified foreigners, it will become an underdeveloped continent."

A problem of territorial sovereignty.

    France no longer has control of its territory.  This problem affects the state, the entry and settlement of foreigners.

    This problem of sovereignty puts most particularly in relief the responsibility of the economic and political elites.  By favoring the entry of immigrants and in inhibiting the inclinations of resistance by our people, the successive public powers are largely responsible before history: it is en effect the same process which largely explains the decline of the Greek cities, then Rome in the 5th century.

    The successive government which have put in place the judicial and social conditions which urge numerous immigrants to come to France are directly responsible for the situation.  This xenophilia manifests itself in particular by putting in place sucking pumps which urge immigration, such as:

- Social grants: the foreigners have the right to RMI, [renenu minimum d'insertion - minimum income support] which is not often the case in their country of origin.

- Family grants: the family allotments are equally available to them, even more important financially as family reunification allows them to bring their entire families.

- Excessively lax standards: the diversion of the right of sanctuary allows the entrance to our territory of foreigners whose lives and liberty are not at all threatened.  Even more, an excessively generous nationality law permits the naturalization of 100,000 foreigners a year, without the state ensuring that they are French in heart and mind.  Thank you Mr. Chevenement!

    Today, it is going too far again by means of putting in place preferential compensatory treatment, remedial quotas for spontaneous discrimination which puts the immigrant once again in the bosom of French society.  This is the case in urban policy, which has become a gigantic mechanism for financial transfers which benefit the immigrant population. 

    The process of destruction of France is much stronger than this rash love of the foreigner which double-crosses itself into the creation of a nihilist example of a formidable hatred complex they hold toward the French population.

The neutralization of national resistances.

    To paralyze the resistance of those who would like to expose the risk of submersion, the intimidating behavior and the strictures intellectuals have imposed on the whole of French society. 

    More precisely, three three techniques of forbidding debate are used:

    - Stigmatizing patriots: it is the technique according to which all valuation of national traditions is immediately suspected of Nazi sympathies, which directly suggest, or more cleverly, in speaking, for example, of a discussion about controlling the migratory stream as like a discussion "which brings us back to the darkest hours of our history."  It is the mechanism of "reductio ad Hitlerism" according to which the simple suggestion of suspicion is enough to disqualify a person or a proposal.  Adversaries of the insane immigration policy followed by the public powers are thereby criminalized.  The activation of references to the guilty memories thus raises screen between the actual problems and the grasp of the collective consciousness on the seriousness of these problems.  The anti-racist and totalitarian mentality is that which claims to be the incarnation of virtue according to the Robespierre model.  Who is opposed to anti-racism is racist, the anti-racist arrogates to itself the right to declare who is racist and who is not.

    - The techniques of the elimination of prickly problems : by legal prohibitions ( the Pleven law of 1972 or Gayssot) or by mutual and tacit consent, one restricts the authorized field of debate.  Immigration has become a taboo subject, about which it is not to be spoken about except in an admiring ecstasy.  Worse still, in the mainstream broadcast media or in the written press, courageous politicians who alert the citizenry to the acuity of the problem are not invited to appear nor spoken about.  The boycott puts it into a perspective which consists less of settling the problem than to silence those who ask it.

It is necessary to preserve French nationality.

    The French nation consists of a territory, a people, a patrimony, a past history, but also a community of principles and values.  The cohesion of the nation, the pledge of its security, demands the subordination of the acquisition of French nationality in light of the drastic conditions.

    Today, every foreigner can acquire French nationality by multiple legal stratagems, in particular:

    - If he lives in France for five years, for an adult;                                                      - If he is born in France, for a minor, from 18 to 13 years old if he lives here for five years;                                                                                                                   - If he is born in France of a French parent and a foreign parent;                              - If he is born in France, even of two foreign parents, if one of them is himself born in France or in a former French territory over-seas;

    French nationality is thus automatically accorded or semi-automatically to some thousands of entering foreigners or immigrants every year, without them having solemnly expressed the desire.

Is French nationality inherited or merited?

    The normal mode of the acquisition of French nationality, that is to say filiation, will be reaffirmed on the basis of the Code of nationality and citizenship : "All infants born of a French father or a French mother."  Except in the case of reciprocity, France forbids its nationals to be equally citizens of a foreign country.  The present bi-nationals must choose : wither remain French and renounce their nationality of origin, or give up their French nationality.          

    It is necessary to base naturalization on assimilation.  All automatic procedures of acquiring it will be repealed.  The only means of acquiring French nationality recognized from now on will be naturalization, which assumes therefore the desire to become French, desire expressed in the form of a request.  This naturalization will not be able to be obtained except after verification of the capacity for assimilation.  As in Switzerland, all naturalization will fall under the municipal council of the government of the place of residence of the applicant.  All naturalized must take a solemn oath of loyalty to France, as in the United States.

    Today, terrorism, like subversive activities or fundamentalism requires the greatest vigilance on the part of the public powers.  Apply the regulations governing prior approval for foreign publications.  Born of the decree of May 6, 1939, these provisions will permit limiting the distribution of terrorist, subversive or anti-French propaganda.

    In applying the principle of reciprocity provided for by international law, the construction of houses of worship financed by states not allowing Christianity will not be permitted.  In applying these principles of French public law on the first rung of national sovereignty, anti-French propaganda will be forbidden in all places of worship.  The foreign agitators operating under the cover of religion will be forcefully expelled.

Republican Order Must Be Preserved.  

     All policy concerning consensual immigration must lean toward the preservation of the values and principles of the Republic.  The Republican law is applied with the same rigor to foreigners and nationals alike.  If it makes use of  juridical system appropriate for legitimate foreigners or immigrants, it must suppress illegal status and behavior. 

    Yet today, illegal immigration is sanctioned and encouraged by the operation of clandestine naturalizations and the laxity of controls.

    On the completion of their sentence, the foreign delinquents and criminals will be systematically expelled to their country of origin, unless it is done in the framework of the transfer agreement.

The republican character of the citizenry and of secularism must be affirmed.

    The Republican tradition confers diverse characteristics on the French citizenry.  This is first of all indivisible with nationality: all nations and both sexes are citizens.  Besides, the citizenry remains equal before the law, which forbids preferential treatment by reason of adherence to a social or juridical category.  No foreigner, clergyman or not, has the rights of citizens because these are indissociable with nationality.

    The Republic rests on the principle of impartiality and the neutrality of the State.  Consequently, in conformity with the separation law of 1905, the Republic does not recognize nor subsidize any form of worship.  All the same, the secularism of public functions and of public information is equally a fundamental measure of the structure of public order.

    The construction and maintenance of these places of worship must remain in the hands of congregations of the faithful.  In conformity with principles of secularism, public powers do not in effect devolve on them.  National security indeed requires the forbidding of the financing of the construction and the maintenance of religious edifices by foreign states.  Secularity does not ban belief, but it demands the discretion of its manifestations to those of public institutions.



The demographic and migratory menace.

    Increasing elderly population is thus one of the most evident consequences of our extended capacity to prolong life, but the fertility rate is also a certain handicap for the future.

    In the next 15 years, the number of people in their ninth decade (80 years old and older) will grow by 50% in Europe while the age group of 0 - 24 years old will see and effective decline of about 7%.  This aging has a major effect.  Europe will be confronted by a smaller and aging work force.  The principle composition of this active population (the category aged 25-54 years old) will decline by about 3%, while the category aged 55-64 years old will grow almost 20% in the course of the next 15 years.

The increasing North/South imbalance.

    The migratory push is a worrying factor in the global imbalance.  The UN is not lying when it predicts a demographic erosion which it projects will overwhelm, in face of  the national fact of which it is still an international manifestation, the importation of millions of individuals from the rest of the world. By 2020, Europe ought to have acquired more than 150 million immigrants and France close to 20 million.

    At the doors of Europe, the pressing reservoirs of populations of the very young who will overtake us in twenty years, 100 million Turks, 100 million in the Maghreb (Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria), 100 million in Egypt, without talking about Eastern Europe and the Asian continent with inexhaustible reserves.

    In 1997, the world counted 5,840 million people, Africa 743 and sub-Saharan 580 which is 10% of the world population.  In 2025, the world will have 8 billion inhabitants, Africa 1,313 and sub-Saharan Africa 1,050 which is 12.5% of the world population.

    The UN estimates that the European population will decline by 30 million people by 2025.  

    Seeing as in the future Europe will not see its population increase by natural growth, the "eurocrats" would like to substitute emigration for the missing population.  To maintain the number of active workers alone in the European Union, it will be necessary, says the report, to acquire 159 million persons in total - if one wants to maintain the current ratio between workers and non-workers.

    To tell the truth, this type of prognostication is not new.   It has already been around for a while, the great demographer Alfred Sauvy, had titled one of his books, "Europe Submerged.  South-North in 30 years."  In it, he explains that the demographic push of the south toward the north of less and less population and more and more aged, is inescapable.  Notice that we do not share this view because one should have a voluntary policy which in any case would oppose it.

    The report of the UN speaks of "migrations of replacement" as if people are, on the surface of the earth, interchangeable pieces without roots, without culture, without traditions!

    This alarmist forecast has not motivated any widespread policy to put the brakes on what necessarily will be an ecological and humanitarian catastrophe.  Catastrophe for Europe and France which will not be able to socially and  economically support such excess weight.  Catastrophe for the emitters of immigration that will lose the active forces to assure their own development.

    In that which affects Africa, the demographic picture is today particularly different.  The rate of population growth remains exceptional, greater than the forecasts and entails a rapid growth of population in numerous countries.  But the  staggering effects of the aids pandemic occurring there are going to modify perspectives as much in astral Africa as in central Africa.

    The resources of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund will not suffice to cope with such a demographic evolution.  The flagrant difference between the demographic growth and the level of development where populations driven by poverty and war take their chances on the European continent.  For a great many of them, they have settled on the periphery of the great urban centers, keeping body and soul together with the state income grants, mired in insecurity, indeed even subversion.

It is necessary to fight against the plague of aids.

    In counterpoint to this demographic vitality, the number of countries of the continent are heavily affected by the aids epidemic, of which the consequences in terms of demographics can not be simply understood.

    Since the beginning of the epidemic, Aids has taken the lives of 18 million people, of which close to 15 million are in sub-Saharan Africa.  In the course of the decade to come, this number will probably double because an estimated 34 million people live with HIV or Aids and about 5 million new infections occur every year.

    Even after a thousand years of epidemics, of wars and of famines, there has never been a mortality rate of this amplitude among the young adults of both sexes and of all surroundings.

Reverse the migratory flux by undertaking co-development.

    The response has to match the seriousness of what is at stake.  It is in this spirit that France must become involved, to preserve its way of life, it must inevitably participate in the renaissance of the African continent.  To reverse the migratory flex and restore the geopolitical equilibrium to the world, Africa must take its future in hand with the numerous trumps at its disposal.

    French patriots have the consciousness of the extent of the task but also of the vital stakes for global equilibrium that covers the harmonious development of Africa.  The big development projects of South African president Thabo Mbeki and Senegalese Abdoulaye Wade are of great importance for the future.

    We welcome this African initiative which rests on the principles of responsibility and national independence.  This initiative marks a real departure even though conflicts still remain a major obstacle to economic and social development.

    We emphasize equally how important it is to work in partnership to improve economic development.

    France has a great stake in revising its relations vis-a-vis its old colonies considering that they can develop themselves alone, certain of our counsel if it is sought, but entirely independently.  With riches present, these countries are completely capable of running their affairs.  France can derive benefit from their harmonious development in the sense that it will profit from it particularly by the means of specific agreements on the provision of raw materials.

    In developing, these populations will be less disposed to immigrate here in difficult, even precarious, conditions of life.

    France must reorient its foreign aid toward truly economic projects.  Integrated development strategies must allow populations to gain a decent standard of living.  Success in this endeavor is to save the world from general destabilization.

The message from French patriots to the Africans.

    I say and continue to say that it is not the impoverishing of France that will enrich Africa.  Never has that formula been fair.  Immigration is a danger for France as it is a menace for the African continent.

    For Africa, immigration is human impoverishment, because it dispossesses them of its vital forces and leaves them in a state of intellectual, moral and structural decay, mortal for its survival.  Even though Africa will need all its sons to build a prosperous economy and a decent future, it is the first victim of this migratory flight and the exploitation of its riches.

    Even more, Africa has become the privileged turf of all the internationalist lobbies and the great western powers, who under the cover of humanitarianism, support certain dictators and profit from great corruption.  From this point of view, France has a particular responsibility in this mafia-like drift in the sense that all the governments, of the right and of the left, have initiated, utilized and profited from the system to finance their personal or political bases.  Remember, in return, that I was the first one to propose, in 1988, the general moratorium of Third World debt.

    It is high time to break with these practices of another age which do not enhance France's greatness and ruins its image among people attentive to its course in this domain.  Disappointed independence or neocolonialist corruptor, whether of Marxist or capitalist origin, has evolved to starve the populations of the exercise of their full liberty.  The stateless multinationals, greedy for profits, have exploited the African riches without redistributing any of the benefits to the population which is always more destitute. 

    We have a great interest in dialogue with Africa in regard to our common history and reciprocal interests. The only reasonable path for the continents of Europe and Africa resides in a close cooperation between the two.

    The Europeans and the French must know that they have everything to gain from the success of these continental renaissance projects because the enrichment of Africa will slacken the migratory flood which threatens us and reverse the flow.

    It is for this reason that France should devote itself completely to this challenge on which its survival depends in part.

    Conscious of cultural diversity, attached to traditions and respectful of human dignity, we defend the liberty of people and nations everywhere in the world.  We are determined to show to the neocolonialists of the left and of the right, trapped in the geopolitical-financier scandals, that the French nationals are the only ones to propose to Africa a true contract which allows harmonious development of the African continent.

    It is in defending this innovative political concept that we effectively combat the single global thought which enslaves our people and gag our nations.  It is with this goal that I propose another dialogue North/South, based on trust, honesty and the truth.

    As you can verify, our program is neither xenophobic, nor racist, but Francophile because we are proud and respectful of our history and grateful to those who have passed on to us the flame of liberty and our heritage.  We hope to give to our people and to our young faith in a French future in the bosom of a community of peaceful nations.

    We cry out our denial of this inhuman world, consecrated to barbarism.  We proclaim our faith in the values that have founded our destiny and, of course, to which we have consecrated our lives and our and our efforts: Our native country, the sum of the dead and the living, guarantor of the future!

    This French future can not be enclosed in the frontiers of a tight Europe that knows only the law of money and demolishes our sovereignty.  The Europe of Brussels is a dead end: geographic dead end, demographic dead end, economic and political dead end.

No Democracy Without The People.

    But to follow such a policy it is necessary also that France change its course.  The only possible solution is to return to the source of the people because the decisions to be taken are or capital importance.  Only the people dispose of the sovereign power to revolutionize politics.

    The institutional powers aver to be powerless to protect the Republic because they have abdicated their responsibilities to supranational and anti-democratic entities.  The elected leaders of the Nation are no longer in the service of the people.  The sovereignty and national independence are surrendered to "total economics."

    Demagoguery consists of believing that one can change things by classical institutional mechanisms even though these are neutralized by sectional demands or international subordination.  We are the true liberators of the French people.

    No candidate for election to the French presidency can reasonably defend an alternative political program other than the national republican program and referendum based on the popular will that we defend.

    The French are becoming progressively more conscious of the political impasse in which they find themselves.  Power has been taken from them by the political class, which, once elected, betrays them.  To loosen the vise and respond effectively to this tyranny of darkness, one must utilize in a deliberate and intelligent manner the mechanisms of direct democracy like the referendum.

    The Republican referendum does not call on exceptional solutions, but leans on constitutional texts, legislation and rules that already exist.  Article 11 of the 1958 constitution permits the President of the Republic to submit a legal plan directly to the electors at the same time on the subjects that he judges worthy of concern by the people: immigration and those subjects!

    - I will propose then to the French to disengage France from the European integration process and to reestablish the Franc as the national monetary unit.

    - I will submit to the people a plan looking to stop, then reverse the influx of immigrants.

     - Finally, I will propose to the people to integrate the principle of national preference into the first article of the French Constitution.

                                                                                                                                           If you can read French, the speech can be found at

Le Pen's website is 

Return to Institute of Election Analysis Home Page

Contact: Joshua Leinsdorf