The Cārvāka Podcast

France Elections 2024 Left Wins Right Loses

In this podcast, Kushal speaks with Catherine Perez-Shakdam about the recently concluded elections in France, where the left-wing alliance in France won the most seats in parliament in an unexpected result, dealing a body blow to the right party of Marine Le Pen.

Follow Catherine: Twitter: @ShakdamC

#franceelections #emmanuelmacron #newpopularfront #nationalrally

Listen to the podcasts on: SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/kushal-mehra-99891819 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1rVcDV3upgVurMVW1wwoBp Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-c%C4%81rv%C4%81ka-podcast/id1445348369 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/the-carvaka-podcast

Support The Cārvāka Podcast: Buy Kushal's Book: https://amzn.in/d/58cY4dU Become a Member on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKPx... Become a Member on Fanmo: https://fanmo.in/the_carvaka_podcast Become a Member on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/carvaka UPI: kushalmehra@icici To buy The Carvaka Podcast Exclusive Merch please visit: http://kushalmehra.com/shop

Follow Kushal: Twitter: https://twitter.com/kushal_mehra?ref_... Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KushalMehraO... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecarvakap... Koo: https://www.kooapp.com/profile/kushal... Inquiries: https://kushalmehra.com/ Feedback: kushalmehra81@gmail.com

Duration:: 1h 4m
Broadcast on:: 12 Jul 2024
Audio Format:: mp3

Namaste, everyone. Welcome to the Charvok podcast. This is your host, Kushal Mehra. Alright, so, last couple of days ago, we had had discussion on the British elections. Today, we are going to be talking about another set of elections that were recently concluded. These elections were in France. And today, we are going to have a very different kind of a discussion because I'm going with the working assumption that a lot of you may not know how elections actually are conducted in France. So, to explain everything about the election, the election process of France, we have Katherine Parrish and them. Katherine, how are you doing? I'm really great. Thank you. How are you? I'm good. I'm good. So, I was trying to understand the process in France, Katherine, but even I found it a little tricky. I was like, okay, there is round one, then there is round two. So, let's start with the very basic today. I'll request you to actually assume that the people who are listening to this do not know anything about French politics or French elections. So, can we start there if you don't mind? Sure, sure. So, the election that we had in France were actually legislative elections. So, normally, they take place about every five years, but it is within the power of the president. She decides, basically, whenever they take place and they issue the take place early. And that was the case. That happened. So, on the back of the European elections, it became very clear in France that there was a clear tale towards the right. I don't actually say the far right, because I think the politics in France has been slightly rewritten, in that the far right doesn't actually feel like the far right, they kind of really made me feel like mainstream. And I think that one of the main reasons for that is that they were not the only party. But the party in the pan, from the monotonyl, reinvented itself away from the very extreme that her father was actually pushing and promoting, to kind of to rejoin I would say a more pragmatic approach to politics in France. And so, I think that today is of today, she represents the kind of center right of 2030 years ago, which is actually quite interesting, because it's been a, that actually tells you that rather than, you know, having extremes in France, you have a push towards the extreme left that has become more extreme in his position. And the right kind of move towards the center. So, the very strange move. And this is not to say that we don't have, you know, the far right in France, but it's I would say in terms of political representation. Now we said that the most of France is, is center right and Macron, or president who claims to be center right, he's actually pushing the words the left. It's a very interesting and weird situation. And so, in the face of the win from the Rasson de Monasional, President Macron decided to call politicians and because he felt, so he said at the time that the prime minister that he had appointed was not representative of popular will. And so, he wanted to fix that. And so, after we went, we had legislative. And in France, it's a very simple kind of a direct way of exercising democracy in that one, one, one, one person, one vote. France is broken up when it comes to electing members of Parliament at the Assembled Asional into the descriptions. Everyone has a list. Several parties are, of course, represented on that list. And then people go to vote, depending on where they live, for that particular list. So, you know, the winner of those elections, if they have absolute majority, there's only one round. If there's kind of a semi majority than this round, which explained why, you know, one or two, it could be one. It's rare. You know, usually it's two and we had two. And we have 577 seats at the Assembled Asional. And that means that in order to win the majority, you have to have half of 577 plus one. And unfortunately, today, because of what took place in the first round of the elections, where the four, there has only one asional. So the, well, they call today the far right, which is more center right, really. One about 37% of the votes, which was not enough to get them through completely. And we had to had around two. And at which point, President McPherson was a great idea to, you know, bearing in mind that he speaks for the right, but allegedly, to call on the left, to create this kind of mass coalition, but they call the new formula to block the rise of the Rassola nomination act. So some people have argued that it was a move that was profoundly anti-democratic, that there was a desire to muddy the waters, which eventually happened. And the result of that is a very broken general assembly, who have a broken parliament. There is no clear majority, other than that, formed by the new formula, that is the left. But the problem is if you take, if you break that down, which is a big umbrella for various leftist factions, there is no clear winner within that, with the clear majority. So it's, it's basically a kind of, whatever, Marine LePel could not establish her authority, although she is the big winner of that, of that election, because she is the only one who did not have to basically link up to anyone or make a deal, broke her a deal with anybody. She stands out on two feet. And she got, she got, she got quite a few seats, so I am 20 if I am not mistaken, which is not the majority, but it's a great big chunk. And the others are leading by 20 to 40 seats, which is nothing bearing in mind that they had to literally gang up on her and find people, you know, under the floorboards to join her coalition. And now, our lovely French president has decided to not nominate a Prime Minister just yet, because obviously from the majority, they should have risen from the, from those elections, a Prime Minister should have been chosen from among the majority party that would have been elected. But because there is no clear winner to those elections, and I have a feeling that it was, it was architected that way. We found us in a situation where our president is not willing to force or to inclined to decide who is going to be the Prime Minister next, and that means that France is unmanageable. And that's fun. So this is very interesting. So it's something like a proportionate representation, but not exactly proportionate representation. Like, what the hell is this? It's what we put in full direct democracy in the sense that one person, one vote, you are electing for your system, your area's prescription, the mobile list of candidates, and whoever has the more votes will hold a seat at the General Assembly and represent his conscription, his or her's, and speak on behalf of the people that it's meant to represent. And that more broadly, because that person is part of a political faction, that faction will have more or less, I would say, influence into the policies of France. So it's, it's a very, France is a very direct type of democracy. It's not like in the UK where, you know, this system is a bit, I would say, fluid, where you could be a party could be very popular, but not have, actually, any seat at Parliament because it would require for the people who are voting for that particular party to be, you know, to be consulted in a particular area where they could win. I think it's even more deluded. In France, it's a lot more direct. So you know, you could actually, you could get a real sense of what France is thinking, what France wants to do, you know, which way it's leaning. And I think that really clearly to that. And I know that a lot of people would disagree with me and say that I'm reading, you know, between the lines, but I'm not, no girls tell you that France is right. And not Michael White, France is right in the way that upsets the left, upsets the center right, because they have very clear views on what should happen in terms of immigration. And I'm not talking about, you know, stopping people from coming in because you and I know very well, and this is the feeling in France too, that immigration is an absolute positive for a country. They're talking about making sure that the people who do come in are willing to play by the rules of the French Republic, that they are not listed somewhere as radical, Islamist or radical, full stop or terrorist. And that those people who do come and have also understanding that they need to abide by the rule of law while being in France. And it's quite simple. I mean, there's no, and it's also an understanding that the system is broken, that housing is in a set of prices, that the health is in a set of prices, that France is in a set of prices, and that before we begin dispersing money right, life and center to other most likely well-meaning people, charity needs to start at home, and that the French people should have priority. Which I don't think is actually a bad notion, and I think it's important for a president and a country to look after its own first. And then once it feels that it can, and should not harm the people, then by all means extend generosity outside. That's a responsibility that we should all bear. But again, if it means that you have to cut off your leg while doing so, I don't think it's very productive. And this is the kind of feeling that the French wanted to iterate the elections, but the work use of being racist, of being fascist, of being this and that has nothing to do with anything. I mean, I'm not going to say that France is not racist because I would be lying. That is not true. France is racist, to an extent. But France also understands that immigration has a lot to do with the strength that France managed to gain since World War II, and if not for immigration. And people coming from North Africa and Africa and the Middle East and Asia. France would not be the superpower that this is. This is not an opinion. It's a fact. Immigration is always a plus without it. A country would die and with that. And I think it would be very boring. And so it's, it's good when it's managed properly. And I think that the issue is that we're conflicting a lot of the time, the issue of immigration with the country's inability to provide the infrastructures required to accompany support immigration. And so the issue is what is the government doing in terms of, you know, the health sector, you know, academia, the economy, the workplace and all those different things, to support and permit for immigration to happen in a positive frame. And the answer is unfortunately nothing. And so we found out that in a situation where these influx of people coming in to France is becoming very difficult to manage because where are they going to live? How will the health sector support, you know, new people to take care of? It cannot because we don't have enough doctors or nurses and whatnot. So the issue again, not immigration. But the fact that the government has failed in providing the services that are actually sworn to provide to to France, the French people and the people living in France. So that's the point that we found myself in. But nobody wants to frame it that way because obviously it doesn't get you a vote. So what sounds very confusing to me is if I look at different aspects of media coverage when it comes to Marine Le Pen, I want to focus on her first. I often use here the word far right being used for her all the time. I'll be the first one to disclose. I don't know her views. I have not followed French politics. So what is the definition of far right in France? Because everybody uses the word far right these days. And I don't know what makes one far right anymore. They call me far right. I'm liberal socially on almost everything. Well, I just moved to France. You should run in the elections. You might be elected. Look, about 30 years ago, so Marine Le Pen come from, you know, she's she's a political legacy in that her father, I think in the 1950s with 60s set up the political party called Monastery, which means the national front. That was labeled far right. It was a very far right party in the sense that they were flat out against immigration. He and for the for the simple reason that he didn't want any foreigners to come to France. So that I mean, the the thinking was completely flawed. It was a little bit ridiculous. Given the fact that his party literally, you know, was birthed in the middle of the the Hong Kong Glorious, which was the three decades that France saw an explosion in immigration and economic growth. Oh, the pride. Because it needed to be revealed following, you know, World War II that on the back of the Gereza independence from France and the end of the the colonial era. A lot of immigrants came came back, you know, somewhere Jarian, somewhere French who had been born in Nigeria and decided to return. There was a mix of people. And so his party really positioned itself against that, this wave of of migration. And it wasn't not just against, I would say, people from North Africa. It was literally against anyone who wasn't blonde blue-eyed, you know, a white French person. So that kind of discounting that a lot of the people, including people from, you know, overseas that are born French with a French passport and the Nazi migrants, but he didn't like the leader. So that that was a clear cut case of far-right kind of ideology, the conduct, you know, we've seen, you know, for decades and decades. And then things are to change in France. And I think that Mahin Le Pen to cover her, her, her father's party. I'm not saying that she's an angel, she's not. For a very long time could not bear to listen to her. And I think a lot of her to do not have to admit to bias because through her, I was seeing her father. And then I started to listen for about a couple of years now to, to what she was saying. And only because she showed up on my TikTok. So blame the algorithm. And then, you know, there was a few things that she was saying that I found myself agreeing with. And I was thinking, hang on a second, I can't be agreeing with the far-right. And, and I listened to her. And again, when she, when she, and she might be, she might well be lying. I'm not saying that I'm not going to be naive and believe everything that she says. But if I was to judge her on the narrative that she holds right now, she's talking about immigrations in the terms that I just described, which in my mind is that I would say a very pragmatic, objective, kind of, you know, normal way to look at it if you have two brain cells in that immigration, again, per se, has been, you know, labeled as a bad word. I don't see why it's a positive. I'm an immigrant myself in the UK. I'm French living in the UK, so technically an immigrant. I don't think that anyone would see me that way, though, which is interesting, because again, there was, I feel the demographic, but then I'm not. I'm an immigrant. And, you know, by virtue of that, I don't see the difference between me and someone coming out of Africa. I mean, my trip was, you know, faster, but I mean, the same principle, I came in from a foreign country. You know, I wasn't born here. I didn't speak the language. I've learned it, like everyone else. I mean, maybe earlier than some, but, you know, I did. And so, there you go. I'm only caught with someone from China, Africa, whatever. Again, it's for me, it's always been about, you know, how is it being handled? Are we protecting both parties in terms of the services that we are providing? And that's the kind of thing that she's talking about. Now she's talking about the importance to hold to from secular values. And again, people may agree or disagree, but if one takes the view that if you decide to come to France, which is a republic, a secular republic that it buys by certain rules, and then you would like to assume that you are willing to play by those rules. And if you don't, then choose maybe another country to go to. And I don't think that's being unfair or, you know, radical to say if you're not happy in France, there's always Canada, there's America, I mean, there's many countries around the world that people could go to and have a wonderful life. So again, her argument was not completely out of this world. And she was talking about the need to crack down on Islamic radicalism, radicalism in all its form, and to make sure that those people who did committed crimes and came into the country without due process, and had been flagged by the police and judged, should be returned as opposed to be let free, you know, as if it's some kind of, you know, reservation, and to wander the streets of Paris or wherever, and commit more crimes or potentially create a security situation, because then we don't know who they are, where they are, and where they do it. Because if you're not registered anyway, if you're not working, if you're not, then, you know, who you and what, and you know, and if you have committed a crime on top of it, why are you here? You know, if you don't have any papers and you come here, you give it, you broke the law to begin with, and so you should be returned. So again, those arguments are not completely crazy. I think very pragmatic. Obviously, it needs to be a case-by-case situation, where depending on the situation, the context of why people came here legally, needs to be looked at, of course. But she's not saying that she's going to send people willy-nilly. She wants to make sure that the law is being, you know, is being applied here. Again, not nuts. She wants the French to have rights over that of foreign nationals, in terms of access to social services, that they contributed to through their taxes. So again, I don't think it's nuts, and I don't think it would be completely crazy to ask for foreign nationals when they come into the country, before they have the chance to contribute, you know, to all those wonderful things that the French enjoy, like, you know, free education, free health service, and all those things, to be prepared premium. You know, those are the things that happen in the UK, for example, in Canada or even in Australia. And so people have a case that are being, you know, a racist demagogue and a populist for pedaling those years, and I don't see why, because again, those things are being applied in other countries quite well. It functions, so why not? We haven't tried it. So again, why not? I don't think it's racist, to say that, you know, France has laws and they need to be protected and applied, and that when crimes are being committed, regardless of who commit them, the person committing those crimes should pay the price. And if they happen to be whichever colour or to pretend to whichever face matters not, because, you know, before the law equal. So those are the things that she says. Now whether or not she means that she's going to apply it, I don't know. But that's what she says. And so a lot of people feel that they wanted to give her a shot, because they tried, they tried everything. They tried the left, they tried the right, with Santa right, rather, with Macron, he promised he lied, he promised again, lied again, and like some more, and they fed up, they fed up, because there's a surge in anti-French sentiment. And I think since October 7th, and you know, the intervention in Gaza, I think have gone from bad to worse, in that people feel so brazen in their not just their antisemitism, but their desire to express their hatred towards France. And I'm like, well, if you don't like it, doors open. People are pretty criticized, but you criticize by burning a flag, and to say that they want to rape French women, and they want to do and whatever, you know, to just have this kind of very open hatred of a country that you were born in. Yes, you never grown from second generation, but you're French technically. And so what is wrong with, you know, pledging allegiance to the flag? And it doesn't mean that you have to give up your life. I'm just saying that just like, you know, you were born here, France gave you, you know, maybe not everything, but give you a shot. And, you know, if you don't like it, change it, but it's up to you. But to just dismiss a country's history and a nation's culture and tradition, just because, you know, you come from somewhere else, and you decide that your values are better than my suggestion would be to return to that place that you long for so much, rather than make, you know, French lives unbearable. And so the French voted and voted, I don't think for racism or for fascism, they voted for a return to France needs to actually be French in that we need to be proud of who we are, what we are, where we come from, and to build with other people together a new France, a France that would be inclusive, and that would be more respectful of the people. But if those other people are intent on bashing us on the head for being French, it's going to be a really hard conversation to be had. So yeah, that's where we are. So from what I understand is this is the standard line that is used in almost every place in the world nowadays with the rise of the anti-immigration sentiment. It's very much rampant in Canada too, with Justin Trudeau just letting in hordes of immigrants in. A lot of them from India, by the way, and listen, at the end of the day, a system is not able to handle pressure beyond the point. It's not racist to say that if you let a million people in, and then you don't have housing to keep more than 200,000 to 300,000 of them, the rates are going to go up, rent is going to go up, and the average Canadian is going to suffer, and that's exactly what happened in Canada. I don't know what this situation is in France because I have not followed France. It's exactly the same. And look, you know, I think more to you point, it actually demonstrates that you have the economics of immigration. And you can't, again, to dismiss them, for me, that's just being psychotic because facts are facts, numbers are numbers. And there is a there's math here that needs to compute somewhere. And again, the sources are finite. And you can't just say, Oh, well, let's wish upon a side is going to make it better. No. Again, immigration, by all means, but let's organize it so that the rules that are being followed allowed for, you know, people to integrate society in an orderly manner without them suffering, with that with them being able to really embrace and benefit from everything that the country has to offer, to allow the children to go to a good school and to have the education that those kids deserve, and all those beautiful things that people want when the immigrants imagine you are outreaching your family and your life, and you're going to have to learn a new language. Do you want to go to a shithole country? No, you want to go to, you know, a country where you're going to build a new life and where you're trying to be safe and have a good education, you know, all those things that everyone wants for their family. So now, if we don't make sure that this is provided for both the new arrivals and the people who are already in the country, then we have a problem because you're going to create instability. You're going to create a sense of disenfranchisement among immigrant communities, but also, I think, anger and resentment, because people will have this feeling that, Oh, it's your fault. You know, you the other than just showed up when the guy is actually just showed up to work and to, you know, to improve and to bring his expertise and his intelligence to the party. But of course, because it hasn't, it hasn't been mismanaged by the government. The government is never to blame, right? And so it's always like the two communities being left to kind of battle it out. And I think it's a ridiculous notion. And I think I'm not trying to take the blame away from people, you know, holding to those views, because I think you need to be held accountable and educate yourself. I mean, if you if you're going to pursue some, you know, ridiculous things, just like it's your fault, you, you're being silly. But, but the government has on everything it can to hide this information to, to, you know, push blame away. And whenever someone has, like I'm doing right now, the argument that maybe we should do better, they say, Oh, so you're racist. You don't like immigrants. I am an immigrant. I have zero issues with immigration. I'm all right. In other words, I'll be standing up myself. So if anything, by, you know, sounds out of a sound of that preservation, of course, I'm going to be in advocating for it. But also sincerely, I mean, what are we if there's not this, you know, kind of friction between people and an exchange of ideas and, and again, it's, we'd be so boring if, you know, we were just sitting amongst ourselves and nothing would move society be static and a society that doesn't move dies. And with us, and I think an injection of new blood and, and beautiful new traditions and colors is wonderful. And it has worked for a very long time. It's just now, I think we reached the point of like, we can't because this state has made it so that there's, there's, there's a block and they're trying to have this grand discussion about, Oh, it's about immigration. No, no, it's about infrastructures. But, but it's so easy to engineer chaos. And she then argue for new laws and restrictions on freedom when there is chaos, because no one is really looking and people are not interested in having the normal conversation that we're having right now about building infrastructures, because it's boring. It's so much easier to say that someone is racist, that someone is this, that someone is that, because then you attack them personally, it makes them more like a click bait type of thing. And, and unfortunately, ignorant people like to have easy conversation and like to get angry at things, because it gives them a belief that they are actually useful for something and that they're not completely, you know, useless, but they are because they redirecting the conversation in a, you know, like direction that will not benefit anyone, even less so immigrant population, and now want them to come. We need immigration, we absolutely need it. First of all, French, like the Brits, don't have babies. So, if you want to sustain, number is true. On average is about two, two points, and a quarter, so the quarter is not going to help you. So, I mean, the best you could hope right now is to stay. But if you want a society to grow, the economy to grow, you want innovation, you want business to thrive, you want all those different things. The population is to grow, society needs to kind of like, you know, reinvent itself every few decades. So, if French people don't have babies, who's going to have them? We need, we need people to come in, right? And so, you know, immigration is a necessity. It's a matter of national security and national survival, but again, structure. It's not that immigration is a problem. I don't know why it becomes so hard when people have these conversations and they cringe. I don't know why the left cringes, but it's who comes in. For example, I have always said that immigration policy should be based on mutual respect that if I move to Canada or America or France or England, I know I'm going to a certain society that is built on specific value systems. In the case of France, it's, you know, liberty, quality, fraternity, the unique concept that the French follow. Yeah. So, in the case of the United States of America, it's all, you know, decentralized societies, freedom obsessed, gun rights, very Christian, you know what you're going there for, okay? You know what society it is. In the case of England, England officially calls itself a Christian nation. It's fine. You go there. You have to respect those societies. Those societies, by and large, run in very secular ways. They don't force their religion on you, and you should respect those systems. If you don't like them, I always say this. You should just like I say in India, in India's case, our system is largely democratic, but we are a majority Hindu society and people like Hindu values in India. And if you have a problem with that, you should not come here. And I always say this, like there was a, there was a bill called the Citizenship Amendment Act, which created a special pass for non-muslims in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, because we have a history in that land, right? We got separated. That was basically India. All these places was India historically. So the non-muslims in that area, the government, the current government, created a bill that would give some of them right to passage and a faster entry into India. In the Indian left, I posted it. They said, why, why not all of them? Well, because the Muslims in Pakistan literally fought for a Pakistan. So we gave it to them. How can we let them in again? I mean, you don't get to pass the same check place. Well, we could handle some argument, some people in front, you know, arguing for, you know, the mass arrival of others. But yeah, it's, look, I want you to be wrong in wanting people. Look, I don't think, and I, I'm going to sound like a conspiracy theory. So I've been sounding at one point, but obviously, because I refuse to think that people, at least, look, I'm going to assume that, you know, if you, if you manage to walk yourself up the ladder and you, you know, you're an MP or you're a minister or something, I would say that you can have a degree of understanding of what is going on, at least a degree. I'm not going to say it's not, not going to go as far, but I'm going to say you have a degree of understanding. And so to assume or to believe that those people don't know exactly what they're doing. For me, it would be stupid on our part. That's why I'm telling you. I think that the, the, the author's thing is, you know, the economics of immigration. I'm not the one that came up with the term, you know, and, and I, I studied finance. So I mean, those are the things that kind of like pop up, you know, and you learn about them. It's just, it's not simple. It's, it's an obvious game. So if they know, and they do nothing, and you can't blame it on the NHS or, you know, in, in France or on, on something else, because we have the equivalent. Then what it is, it's architected. And why is it architected? Again, I'm going back to the idea that when chaos ensues, and that people are always very quick to find, you know, who is the culprit? Who can I blame outside of myself? Because obviously, you know, I cannot be held accountable for the crime that I'm in right now. It's so much easier because people would then, you know, stop bashing each other on the head and be blaming like, you know, the ground one, the black one, the whatever, the bright one, because it's easy. Let's reduce people to colors because that's just, you know, life works that way. And the real culprit, the government, offered to do whatever they want under the guise of, again, fixing the problem. And that means, you know, avoiding at our civil liberties and taking away our freedoms and people will be too busy arguing over the color of, you know, the neighbor's shoes that they want pay attention to what is actually going on. And the real solution will never be hard. And then you wake up on day and you under a flag you can't recognize. And, you know, onto an ideology that you don't know could come back, unfortunately. And here we are. Yeah, it's, I just, I have failed to understand this simple argument that all cultures and all values are not equal. People who like certain values, for example, people who believe Hamas has a better value structure should go and stay in Palestine. They should, which recommends calling the pope and asking for an access, frankly, that is my, but if people believe that Hamas has any value whatsoever, other than murder, you know, anyone who doesn't absolutely, what I mean, absolutely agrees with them. And I mean, each other, mind the way, then they need to have the head examined because there is no value system to be had on the Hamas. And Hamas is a terrible, terrible organization, it's a terrorist organization. For a reason, they commit acts of terror and atrocities against humanity. And I'm not saying that because I'm Jewish, they're not just doing it against the Jews, they're doing it against Palestinians and whoever claims. And I'm going to say this very slowly so that people get it. Whoever claims to be standing for or speaking for Palestinians need to understand that if they truly want for them freedom, which and they should, they should want for them freedom, they should want to state for them, they should want all the things that we take for granted today. It doesn't go through Hamas. Hamas would be the end of the Palestinian cause. It would be the end of Palestinians. It would be the end of the idea that is still Palestine. And that if that's what they want, it's fine. If they also want to be remembered in history as those guys that allowed for women and children. And I'm talking about Palestinian women and children to be used as meat for the cannons by Hamas because it was so convenient just because autismism comes naturally to them. Get your head examined because you are sitting on the wrong side of history and history will remember you. And unfortunately for you today, everything lives around the internet. So it won't be fun. And I say this, life is secret and not just mine, but that of everybody, even those people I don't like, because it's not up to me to call for the death of people on the basis that they don't look like you, they don't sound like you, and you don't like them is despicable. Not to go for a jet to call for, you know, a country to defend itself against terror is a legitimate stand, the only stand because when you want to extend compassion to murderers and terrorists, that is an injustice, a terrible injustice against the victims of those people. So be careful where you stand and where you tread. And of course, I'm not, you know, trying to pinpoint at anyone, but whoever recognize the stuff in my speech. Well, you're welcome. So I have another question because that this is something that I had popped up in my timeline too, where people are alleging that, oh, they actually robbed Marine Le Pen of this opportunity to win. Do you think that was a fair assessment? Like political strategies happen all the time, right? No, that's just a fair thing to see. Like I said, it's not a manipulator, in front of the community, to vote in the sense that one person won vote, and then the list did not change. So there was no change other than this massive push on social media and in the media for the left and every well-meaning front person to not vote for Marine Le Pen. So I think that, because look, historically speaking, at the first round of any elections, including the presidential elections, the front stand to have a vote that is not necessarily the one that they mean. It's more like a knee-jerk reaction to statement. You say, hey, we really are happy. We're going to vote for the extremes to scare you a little bit in the center and make you wake up and make you understand that, you know, if you don't tool the line, this is what we're going to go. So that's what happened in ground one. Now, ground two, she's been gaining ground. I mean, fast. I'm not taking anything away from that. But you say that she was robbed, is an over-exaggeration in my mind. There was definitely a game at foot, and I think it's just so strange. For a French center-run president and father, a unbektaz has ever happened to literally go to the further corner of the left and say, guys, do you want to unite against the other one who's like on my side of the fence? And I'm like, I did not quite understand what Michael was doing. Other than, other than, and I think this is the biggest joke. The joke is about us, because we went to the vote. We went to the ballot, the ballot box is sorry. So we voted. So essentially, we exercised the democratic rights. But because of Macron's manipulation, and I have to give it to him to do it small, we got hats. We lost, because now we have no majority. No one knows what the heck they want or the doing. No one quite understand what was that about or why. We don't have a problem in this stuff. So Macron is still kind of the great hero of our times. And the French, I have no idea what he's going to do next. And Martin Lippen has zero power. And so we're like, okay, so what do we do? Are we going to be voting on when the trash is being taken out? So what's up? We don't know. So I would say this, Martin Lippen was not about doing anything, but Manuel Michael, he's like, honestly, he's like the Guidini of French politics, and actually pulled the rug from under all of our feet while we were, you know, screaming for democracy and, you know, all those beautiful things in the world. And he ain't going nowhere. So that. So he won. That's my take way of the French legislative president, Michael won in an election that get that he did not even run for. So I think that's brilliant. So wait a minute. You got to give it to the man. You got to give it to the man. I was thinking, because you know, at the end, when I saw the result, I was thinking, are you kidding me? Because I was, I was ready. I was thinking, you know, we're going to change, whichever, but change is going to happen. And it was really the question where I have friends in front that were like, you know, we had like once the case, in case we got to go. And then we have, we have the real estate agents on the other side of the table thinking, if it goes well, we're going to buy any house. And it's insane. And I'm like, so what are you doing? And then we don't know. So we're going to, we kind of between, we don't know what to do. And this is literally what's going on in front. So whatever. So, so how, how does the, like, how does your parliament or the equivalent of the parliament or the legislation happen then, when you have such a harm, like, how does policy happen? That's the thing. It doesn't, that's the thing. It doesn't, that's the, this is the people think it's just the way, no, he's because this is the thing. I think he knows the French, more than the French know themselves. Because he knew, if you put the four left and the four right, and you put it, and you send the dog, I mean, they're going to start like barking everywhere. And everybody's going to accuse themselves, you're the fascist or you're the fascist, you're not sitting with this, you're communist or whatever. And so they were all arguing. And, and they tried to build those, like, various coalition. And at the end of the day, they deluded the message so much and fragmented in front societies so much that we literally, like, two clowns holding the same baton, but nobody can move. And like, my brother was like, sitting in the middle saying, guess what? I'm the one with the, I'm the puppet master. Are you guys going to be dancing to my junior jail for 2020 sevens? So, yeah, France, I'm glad to be in the UK. I'm telling you that, but so basically, do you think they might have a re-elections then, Macron White, and, and this time he might fight, say, now you know what happens? That's it. That's it. Like, we've done. So, Nike, I think he wanted to make a point. I think he was in a situation that was very dangerous for him politically and that he could not, you know, the front were really angry. And, you know, as well as I do is that, you know, when you have, you know, an angry population and you want to do some part before, you need to let go of this, you know, that you need to let some team out. And I think that's exactly what happened. Now, they're going to have election fatigue. What they're going to do, go to the ballot box every two weeks after they shot on the Israeli for doing so, for like a year or two, you know, and having like, oh, we have a new foreign minister every like, you know, 15 days. It's, it's becoming a joke. And, and also he's going to say like, well, I did it already. You, you messed up. And let you do it. Kind of helped you. But, you know, you did that. I'm good until 2020, you know, 20, 20, 27, you know, when the new presidential take place. And he's not running anywhere. So who cares? He doesn't care. He's good. He, you know, he finished going to finish his mandate. He's going to tell the front at all job. You know, you stuck in between, you wanted the far right, I gave you the far left. You're welcome. And so, now we have people, but this is the craziest part. We have people like the military, who's honestly, like, I mean, this guy just, he needs, he needs, he needs like, a psychiatrist. I mean, I'm calling anyone who wants to volunteer. Please do. Please call the guy. He's crazy. I mean, search it. But there's another one. The more who's like, even, I mean, on this scale, I'm crazy. And I love it. He's just like, he's off the charts. He's left first. But I'm going to go with the normal, I mean, you know, what crazy, but kind of like, French crazy. Milanchon. Who had, I think, something like 90 seats or 80, which is like, it doesn't compute. It's like, it's like a small little purple dot, you know, in Parliament. The guy is just like, I want to be five minutes, I get the majority. Now, no, you didn't. People literally have lost the mobiles. He thinks now that he won, because Marine Le Pen did not win. So he understands someone else, someone else is not winning and he's winning. And I'm like, no, it doesn't work this way. There's something or math. There are numbers. And unfortunately, for him, the left hasn't invented a way to kind of redraw numbers and reorganize them in order that fits their reality. But I'm sure that will come. Maybe he will tell you that he identifies as like, you know, 377 and not 80. And so therefore, we need to live in that reality. I have no idea, maybe. That's insane. The French result is so far. Like, okay, I understood the British result. I could understand. I could make. I think the Tories, their vote got split with reform and they suffered. I mean, listen, 14 years is a long time in politics for a political effort. No, I think like the, yeah, yeah, I mean, look, it happened. But yeah, I think, I think it was time for like, you know, renewal, first blood, you know, labor. I labor one parent square, to be fair. Yeah, they won fair and squared. I understand the voting percentage was down. I understand the problems with the organization, the Muslim vote. And I understand all those issues. And I'm very alert to that. I'm aware of the rising anti semitism in the West. I've covered a lot on the podcast. It is very scary. No worries me, Rachel, it's not just not just anti semitism. There's been, because I've been monitoring what's happening in the Hindu community too. It's not good. It's not good. Because it's almost like, do you know how we used to kind of, people did not draw parallels? Because anti semitism kind of existed in a song bubble for a very long time. But because it's coming, there's a lot of, you know, Islam or fascism. Unfortunately, you know, the usual culprit are not targeting the usual demographics. And I had somewhat expanded. I think because the government has been unable to stop anti semitism. They've felt not so brazen to extend the hatred to other communities. And my issue is this, is that anti semitism is so well talked about, in that it's been, I mean, it's old, fortunately. And so there's an awareness that is set. Now, I've spoken to a few friends of mine, who are not necessarily well versed in politics, but they're not stupid people. And, you know, they are, you know, they move in society and they have their own businesses or, you know, whatever. I mean, they, you know, they're smart people. And they're not aware that it exists. And that scares me, because I'm thinking, okay, if people who are quite, you know, well, well to do, and far from being stupid and well educated, are not aware, because they don't work in politics, that Hindu hate is a thing that is rising in the UK. That tells me that the Hindu community is actually more at risk than I thought, because there's a lack of understanding from the public that there's a need to defend and protect. And that scares me, because you don't have, like, we do in the Jewish community, the wealth of experience and draft me, it's not fun. But then we have certain mechanism and reflexes and, you know, things that we would want with it. So we know what to do. And this is not to say that you don't know what to do, but I don't want you to have to learn what to do. That's, that's why I'm trying to, you know, to stay, because it scares me. I don't want anyone. When I say, like, you know, what my daughter had to go through and the things I had to go through when I was a kid, do I want anyone to go through? It sucks. It's, it's really, it's not fun. You know, it teaches you to be so prudent to people and to be a bit on the defense and to not welcome people as easily as you should. And I, I really don't want this for the Hindu community in the UK, because I think it would be a loss for the UK if they would decide to leave, because right now you have an exodus of Jews from Europe. The chief rabbi of France literally told us to just get the heck out. I mean, that was literally his word, get the heck out. It's not safe for you anymore. This is a conversation that has been, I mean, just in a literally 10 minutes before I was looking to you, I was looking to a really good friend of mine. And, you know, we were kind of thinking, okay, so what do we do? Do we go? Do we stay? Should we just, you know, bug out and just like, you know, call it today, because enough. And if we do go, it's going to be an intellectual exodus is going to, it's going to be, I mean, Britain and Europe will bleed out good people, money, you know, brains. Imagine, imagine if you, you add to this, you know, the loss of the Hindu community. I mean, like, you're going to have in Britain, well, at two buildings, why would be left of Britain's multiculturalism or France, or any other country in Europe, but it works for that matter. And that really terrifies me, because I'm thinking, you know, all those years of crafting and working and, you know, putting a kiss through schools and making sacrifices for your family to see them grow and to see them get in great education. And she suddenly, you know, to see you sons and daughters become doctors and surgeons and, you know, head of companies and MPs and all those wonderful things. So what now? What now? Just because you have a bunch of fascists that decide to, you know, scream like, you know, death to everybody to everything and everybody? I don't know. It's just, it doesn't sit right with me. And again, it's not being talked about. You have to look, you have to really Google it to see it. And even I suspect that because there's no strong kind of lobby or voice in the UK, that probably half of the crimes, you know, are going undetected. And also because people may feel that they don't have the courage or the structure around them to speak up, that they would cause more trouble for themselves, that they don't even talk about it. And that worries me, because I do not want young, you know, young men and women to go unspoken and for them to feel that there's anything wrong with them, because they don't abide by certain rules, and they are slightly different because that kind of difference, I want for the UK, I want it for Europe, it's a beautiful type of difference. And we need more of these things. Thank you. So do you think with this far left coalition coming into so-called power in France, and you have no prime minister, given that that is the assumption, do you think Islam fascism will get a new lease of life in France? Careful to stop them. Who's going to stop them? I mean, look, already, already, even though the left in France claimed to have won those legislators, there was a riot in Place de la Republic where the French flag was burned, they defaced their statues, I mean, they burned things because they can. People are every day, I mean, it's every day. There is not a day that I open Twitter or whatever. And I see, you know, men decapitated, women raves, this, you know, little girl kidnapped, this, that. And I'm thinking, are you for real right now? Are you for real? And unfortunately, and I wish, I wish I could tell you any different. It's always from the centre of my graphic. And it's not because they're bad people, or because, you know, people coming out of, you know, the Middle East or whatever, it has nothing to do with region, it has to do with the ideology, that is brainwashing people into believing that, you know, this is great crusade to be fought against the West. And what people don't understand also, and I'm going back to two seconds on antisemitism, is that antisemitism is a criticism of the Jews. The West was built on the Judeo-Christian tradition. So there's the Jew in there. So everything that the West stands for, Christianity stands for, has been built on the foundation of Judaism. This is not to say that Judaism is better. That's just, that's the way it works. Judaism can first on Christianity. It's a continuation that doesn't actually negate. So, you know, Judaism is not negated by Christianity, and I don't think that Christian feel that Judaism was negated by the existence. It's a continuation. It's a beautiful, I would say, you know, spiritual journey. That's right. That's how I look at it. And people identify, you know, differently. That's fine. And so there's a danger here, and that they don't see, is that in the mind and the mouth and the spirit of Islam, or fascist, by targeting the Jews first, it's a way in to better come to hating sacrifices and calling for the death of the Christian. The Western world, because antisemitism is old, it comes easy and naturally to people, and usually doesn't raise suspicion. And so it's very easy to hide in the detail, and the devil is in the details. But actually, everything to do with the Jews, it was just, there was just a convenient conduit for the hate. That the end game is, and always was, the death of the West. And I would like to remind everyone that the slogan of the Islamic Republic of Iran is death to America, death to Israel, in that order, order matters. So they didn't say, oh, let's kill Israel. And then we clean up, no, death to America. As if happens in order to do that, they first need to try to kill Israel. They're going to happen. But that is, that is the intent. And you see this translated in the streets of Brods. And until people learn to call, the speed of speed and to decide to call that evil, that is the Islamic Republic of Iran, an Islamic fascist state that needs to be proscribed by starting with the RSGC. How the heck do you want to protect anybody? How? And now you have children that are being bashed in the heads, coming out of schools, you have, and those kids can be Muslim Christians. It doesn't stop, because as far as Islamic fascists are concerned, anyone is fagging. That does not absolutely abide by their views. If you don't have your headscarf in the right way, if your name is felt, you know, in the way that it's not according to Sharia, I mean, whatever it is, are different. It's ridiculous. And good people are dying. Good people from the Muslim community, Hindu community, Christian community, Jewish community, whatever community. The point is people are dying. And for some reason, people are arguing, other, you know, there's always an excuse because those poor people coming out of whatever, you know, had a very terrible life where people have terrible life. They don't go around raping and beheading people because, you know, they had a terrible life. Like, there's something called self-restraint. But apparently they can't exercise it and the left fun excuses. I'm kind of through with those excuses. That won't work. All right, I have a couple of questions from the viewers. So somebody has asked, was there any evidence of foreign interference or big tech interference in the French elections? Was there any to what that? I don't know. I don't know. I'm going to be look, I'd love to tell you that I've done some research in it. I haven't because I've been busy with my thing, trying to look into foreign inferences in America and in the UK. So I didn't look. But what I'm going to say is this. Martin Lefem has been accused to be and that there's not, that there's not me laying blame. I'm just saying what was said in the press. That she has been paid by, you know, the Russian lobby. It's true. The same can be said about many people in front. We know that some politicians in France have been bought by Qatar upon that they receive also funds from people quite close to Hamas. Or they put pictures with people close to Hamas. So you could draw conclusions or not. Look, my assumption would be like most likely because where you have big interests, there is big money, whatever this big money and elections is in the horizon. Of course, they're going to try to influence and defend their best interests. So I'm going to say it's deeply for sure there were from where in whom I don't know. Fair enough. Next question is, it's about when we were talking about immigration, someone has asked what value should immigrants have to be liked when they move in a society. But that depends on what society they're moving. I don't think it's the question of being liked because you can't be loved by everybody. And this notion that in order to exist and to be valued, you know, it needs to be reflected through the eyes of others, I think is delusional. I'm going to say, respect yourself. You're a good man. I mean, look, you and I live on the law. Yeah, and look, you and I, you know, became friends. We come from very different backgrounds, you know, I was raised in one place, you were raised in another. I don't think that we needed like somewhere to translate in terms of what do I think is, you know, makes a good man, you, and you know, what you consider like, you know, would make a good friend. Me, I'm just going to jump to conclusion. I mean, just don't kill love animals because I mean, I have cats. I mean, like, you know, be a good person, just be kind and compassionate, but not naive and not don't be compassionate out of cowardice. You know, just just be compassionate for real when it's necessary and just in fact, you know, be fair, see people for what they are, as opposed to what they look like or the color of the skin or hair because you could change it. So like in this nothing. Also, it's completely irrelevant. You know, educate yourself, be respectful of other people's, you know, belief without giving up your own. That's the thing. You don't have to give up your belief. Just if you believe or to be head people for fun on a Sunday morning, I said, don't move. They way you are. You know, that's it. But don't, don't, don't try to be liked. No, like, you know, this is charge things like, I'm a flight and I'm still breathing. There you go. It works. Yeah, I always, when I go to any country, like I, I'm in a unique position where I'm living in India and Canada both. So I kind of understand the immigrant mentality while I also know the mentality of the native because I'm a native in one country and an immigrant in another country. So it's a very unique perspective and it has taken me a while to understand the immigrant's perspective and the native person's perspective. And to be honest, I've learned to respect people in Canada and when they have concerns about immigration, I've actually learned to respect that because I have those own concerns when I live in India. And at the same time, I've learned it through living how racism or many bigoted things can be spewed under the garb of immigration. And now I have realized that the line is actually very clear that what makes a good immigrant and what makes a good immigration policy is actually not that hard to understand and it's fine. And I don't know why people find it very offensive when they have these discussions. I think these discussions are very easily solvable and eventually it should not be a matter of like debate. It's just like super easy. Bring me numbers. I'm going to start it out real quick. It's not hard. Just invest in infrastructure. It's just done. Come in. You're welcome. Seriously, it's not hard. And once you're there, you follow the law. Obviously. And also the notion is like, if you break the law, you create the price, good job, like everybody else. There's the equality before the law. That is one of founded principles and the function in democracy. Once you do that, it's fine. I mean, I don't really care why you come. I mean, people could come from malls for like apps. Yeah, well, you know, it's very interesting. But just before we go, what is the future of French polity? Like, what is the future of Marine Le Pen? I mean, she's not getting any young. She would be president for sure. I mean, look, you just need to look at her trajectory and you know, she she lost, but it wasn't. I think I think she got overly excited by the hype. You know, thinking as the, I can smell, I can smell like, you know, Prime Minister's office. And it wasn't for her. It was actually for her number, her number one in the party, Jordan Botella. And he lost, but he's a 26 year old kid. I mean, like, if you'll care, he will, he will make it through. I guess if she's good enough, if she answers the questions that the French people are asking, she will be elected. You know, the French system is a very complicated one to to kind of derail because one vote, one person, especially for the presidential job done, like it's hard. It's really hard to kind of mess that one up. It doesn't mean it can't happen. It's not, it's not like the, you know, the US elections where you could, you could have all kinds of shenanigans happening. This is a bit harder. Um, and, and we'll see. But look, we, I think we also need to move away from party politics and this notion that all right and left because like I told you, it has been, it has been rewritten so much, you know, since 30 years ago that the foreign right has become the center and the center has become the left. I mean, it's really weird. It's been a really, really tilt. So I think we need to maybe, whatever we try to kind of rerun it differently and say, this is the party that aligns the closest to my views. Because see, I have this thing where I'm kind of, when it comes to the economy and defense, I'm quite conservative, but you know, I would, I would tilt towards the left when it comes to, you know, to, to what's happening within the country in terms of, you know, we, we should lead through compassion, not stupidity. But I'd like to think that, you know, being too harsh on people, I don't think it is, it is working to enable them to do nothing. It's not helpful either. You need to have some kind of a fair needle. And, and I do believe that we have a responsibility to those who cannot, that I believe that we have to. We also need to be focusing on education on young people to invest in that because of the future. So it's kind of like a dark moment. Like, well, yeah, our mother, so we come also kind of naturally. There's many things I think we should do that are more kind of like labor. But it doesn't mean, but I don't identify with either. It just depends. And so I think I identify more with people, you know, particular politicians. And I think that people need to learn to do that more rather than just abide by an ideology because lots of the time actually they get betrayed. Because those people are just jumping on that because they want to vote rather than actually represent those values. So it's a bit tricky. Fair enough. Katherine, it's been an absolute pleasure to talk to you. I wish you all the best. And I hope the new projects that you're working on get, get fructified. And so Twitter is the best way to get in touch with you. Katherine, I've added your Twitter handle. You could also, I will drop you. Well, if anyone wants to get in touch with me, it's check them, see on Twitter, just drop me a direct message. I always answer, might take me a second, but I promise I will. If anyone wants my email, I will drop it on Twitter if you want to discuss what we're doing at the foreign foreign relations and all the beautiful projects that we're working on. And I'm not going to put that right on online. I don't know if I'm going to get. Never. Never. Never. It's always a pleasure, honestly. And my best to your family. I think you won't before you do an amazing job. And love you guys. All right, guys, we'll wrap today's discussion. Once again, Katherine Sorehander is in the description. So go follow her on social media. If you're, if you want to know more about her think tank and the work she's involved in, you can go and get in touch with her. And she will be more than happy to share the details. As far as I'm concerned, you know the drill. If you want to support the Chadwick podcast, you can become a member on Patreon and YouTube. You can buy the merch on crucial mirror dot com product merch. You can send your donations through UPI. If you can't do any of that, just like this video, subscribe to the channel, comment in the comment section. And if you're an audio listener, leave a rating on your preferred audio platform. I'll see you guys next time. Until then, namaste. Take care. Bye bye.