Tag Archive | "LePen"

An alliance between Muslims and the European ‘Far Right’? – Part 2

What follows below is the conclusion of the translation of Albert Ali’s article, “Osons Marine?” in which he tackles the issue of institutional Islamophobia among various French political factions, and concludes with some comments on why Marine Le Pen is a possible candidate for some French Muslims.

The first part of Ali’s article, as well as an explanation of its background from both the editor and the translator, is available here.  Once again, the ideas herein are solely those of Mr. Albert Ali.  Francophone readers are encouraged to read Ali’s original article (link available in Part 1).

The Grand Mosque of Paris: Even today it serves as a reminder of the complex relationship between France and its Muslim population

III. Islamophobia as placebo for legitimate concerns of the French.

All Muslims today are worried — with good reason — about the sudden explosion of Islamophobia, institutionally, politically and in the media. They also correctly point out that “far right” parties in Europe, with their Zionist orientation, have widely used Islamophobia to promote their own interests. But in this respect as well, are we asking ourselves the right questions? It is beyond any reasonable doubt the Front National has anti-Islamic tendencies, but there are also “pagans” who even consider Christians as invaders. Others are “Traditional Catholics” of the Crusader mentality, while others are nostalgic who yearn for the time of Charlemagne. Still others are disappointed about the loss of French Algeria.

There is a multitude of reasons which explain the historic Islamophobia at the base of the Front National. However, if “lack of Islamophobia” is to be a criterion in the selection of the Islamic vote for the presidential elections, then not a single candidate can meet our requirements, except perhaps [Nicholas] Dupont-Aignan [1]? It is true we have not yet seen him distance himself from certain aspects of Islamic practices in France. Dupont-Aignan remains a solid electoral choice to initiate Muslims in the authentic and transcendent French sovereignty.

But this is not the question at hand. The main concern is whether or not this French reaction towards Islam and Muslims has to be one of those historic contradictions of our country – a metaphorical fascination and disdain of “Madame France” towards her mysterious neighbor “Mister Islam”. France, the country which started the Crusades, is also the country which has seen the alliance between Charlemagne and Harun al-Rashid, between Francis I and Suleiman the Magnificent. The distrust and the animosity towards certain Islamic customs can be found both with the ultra-secular apostles of lethal Leftist atheism as well as at the base of the Right-Wing government.  For the latter, it happens in the name of protection of a certain notion of French identity. Contrary to where one could place her father because of his past, the current exaggerated Islamophobia of Marine is strangely enough mixed in with an unexpected rise in secularism for a party which has for the most part been anchored in less Republican notions, or which at the very least could be related to Catholicism and tradition.

Hence, the question at hand is how we are to interpret the Islamophobic ecumenism of our politicians. For the Marinists, this translates into using the paradigm of the “Clash of Civilizations” as an electoral strategy which could pay off (they think they will be able to control the intensity of the shock). Unfortunately, too few Muslims are interested in influencing these people to take up a less radical position. Concerning other parties, it is but a political strategy of deceitful camouflage, considering they can’t deny what it’s actually all about: massive and uncontrolled immigration.

This sentiment has been instilled onto the French population by the same elites which overflow with antiracist rhetoric. On the one hand the Left, is immigrationist by ideology, and on the other hand the Right hides its economic immigration under the pretense of a few small, symbolic charters.  Both sides use Islamophobia as an electoral issue, because ultimately it is but an overused way to answer the legitimate identitarian concerns of the French and to vent their anger through abstract notions such as gender equality, animal welfare and public order in the streets. This is so they don’t have to take responsibility to call the physical people by their name: immigrants.

We all know Muslims in France aren’t native Bretons, but rather represent an aggregate of over sixty nationalities and their descendants, who speak over twenty languages and dialects passed on to them while living in exile. In other words, the Muslims of France an irreconcilable mishmash of uprooted communities, who live in a permanent state of rivalry and conflict. Not one unifying power, not even Islam, can unite their interests. The media-powered Islamophobia reacts to this shock of diversity by focusing on the immediately observable elements, which are the visible manifestations of Islam: normative clothing, street prayer, halal shops. In every society, there is an “optimum of diversity”, a limit to variety which cannot be crossed.  Once crossed, this notion suddenly transforms from being a weak nuance which ‘enriches’ the majority to a clash of cultures. Our France has, despite and thanks to ourselves, turned into a demographic bomb of conflicting diversity, as if it were a bundle of chemical concoctions which have turned unstable.

Is Islamophobia being used as a surrogate for anti-immigrant sentiment that cannot be openly expressed by politicians? If so, then French Muslims must re-examine their attitude towards immigration, says Ali.

To many, immigration is reverse colonialisation, a substitution of the populace and the cultures as planned out by the political elites. It suffices to take the subway to Seine-St-Denis [2] in order to see first hand this inescapable atmosphere and oppressive “Babelization,” which is destructive to our cohesion. The immigrants and their children have both turned into the instrument of destruction of this nation as well as its first victims by social dumping, in which they work as the pillar of support! Those who don’t think immigration is a stumbling block should know this is in fact the central matter at hand!

Muslims who are in favor of immigration should be more honest in expounding their arguments in favor of immigration. Also, they should also realize to which extent their categories of analysis are being dictated by the Left. How can one justify the support of illegal aliens from an Islamic point of view? Every politically conscious person who is not dominated by sentimentalism and who surpasses emotional imagery (that of the crying African mother holding onto her child after having “forgotten” her papers in Africa while being surrounded by the police) can only reject the current migration policies. Elsewhere, in Muslim countries, people don’t mince words: “in certain Gulf countries, one can’t tell anymore whether one lives in an Arab Muslim country or some Asian region. We can’t speak of “diversity” here. No nation on earth can accept the erosion of its culture on its own soil.” [3]

Protecting the cultural foundations of a people is part of the fitra [4]. Ideological multiculturalism is a rejection both of the fitra and of the Divine Volition which divided the people in separated and homogeneous communities so they can come to mutual understanding, not so they can mix [5]. If this is true, then it is even less desirable for people to be uprooted and to mingle, thousands of kilometers from their native lands, in a globalized “stew” without standards.  This is the cemetery of Islam in Europe and it undermines every reinvention of the ijtihad meant to reach an Islamic surge. I would like to see people show me how immigration is supposed to be a good thing for Islam and their country. Personally, I believe this is its black hole of impoverishment and sectarian disconnect.

On the matter of antiracist ideology – a religion founded by Leftists – it has been forbidden to the French to complain about instilled “diversity” ever since the thirties.  What should we do about the accumulated frustrations of the “underdogs” (translator: In French, “sous-chiens,” referring to the native French) which should testify to “the erosion of their culture on their soil”? How does one suppose politics will react to this catastrophe when they caused it themselves, without channeling the legitimate concerns in the face of disownment of their nation and collapse of their culture? Their response: by legal and media-fueled Islamophobia! They would much rather have us being despised because of our exotic Islam, so can submitted to the populist wrath of the people!

Thus, today, one can no longer claim “France for the French”, one now says “France without Sharia”!

We must look at the peculiar paradox which — to me — is the primordial paradigm of our current situation. Why have our friends of the system’s Left and Right kept up this massive and useless immigration for the past 40 years, while being equally violent in the face of the religion indissolubly connected to these immigrants? Answer this fundamental question and you will have the key to understanding these quasi-inescapable conditions in which we find ourselves locked. A prison which is subtly pulling us towards civil war with discontent and blindness on every side, as can be seen in the comments here (translator: this article first appeared on Oumma.com), which are the counterparts of the comments on Fdesouche (translator: a French identitarian blog).

IV. Vote — if you must!

If voting is “halal” is a topic which is already in need of some serious debate between Muslims considering the democratic travesty and the criticism of the democratic-oligarchic system in which we live today, then we have to surpass the usual slogans of the Muslim elites of the past 25 years.

In the past, the slogan was: “Vote for whoever you want, just vote!”  Beyond slogans, though, we have to muster the courage to name names, to make a choice and to justify this choice. The presidential elections really are pointless and the Muslims don’t have the power to realize any real change in this respect. It will always remain the old UMPS (translator: a play of words on UMP and PS, similar to Republicrat) model ever since the fall of De Gaulle in ’68, not in the least due to a current friend of Leftist Muslims. Some of the ignorant and naive call to vote for Maçon Mélenchon, who has been senator and member of the Parti Socialiste for 31 years and who today has suddenly become an enemy of the system, or they call to vote for some other small and folkloric organisation which is equally unable to realize anything whatsoever. But then we will once more vote for a second round of UMPS, so these people are grossly mistaken. During the presidential elections, we are not even a factor percentage-wise. Our electoral weight is insignificant. During a second round we will do nothing but solidify the UMPS system in its place, considering France – even before Greece and Italy in 2012 – had a banker at its helm, named Pompidou. Eventually, we will be presented the choice between those responsible for the current malaise and those guilty of the nearing cataclysm.

In conclusion: the presidential elections are an event of symbolic value without precedent, a moment for expression of opinion which only occurs once every five years, a specific moment where the deaf and condescending candidates are obligated to listen to our message. Again, should we recognise to be pro-democracy, know that if we now neglect the current call to Arabs, it will mean our message has truly aged. Then we are once more preparing the tag team, which is the oligarchical solution. Time to take up our responsibility.

Awaiting a better future, I invite every Muslim – just like in 2007 – to be conscious of our situation as the eternal losing side of history. Let us enter the political annals through the main gate. Let us become conscious of how only the political fundamentals are relevant today.


  • Let us safeguard our national sovereignty against the only enemy of importance: not the “younamare!” racism (translator: a play of words, “we have had enough”), nor the colonialization of the past, but in fact that of mondialism, the supreme ideology of the fasâd.
  • Let us safeguard our military sovereignty by quitting NATO, our economic sovereignty by quitting the Euro, let us abolish the Law of 1973 (translator: the banking law Pompidou-Giscard-Rothschild) and let us start the reindustrialisation. Safeguarding our cultural sovereignty by liberating public schools of the influence of the markets and of globalistt curricula, restoring our sovereignty over our foreign policy, our liberation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its Zionisation, our sovereignty over our borders. Only sovereignty can still allow us the recovery of a France which is capable of radiating and of reconciling itself with its Muslims.

"Choosing between Sarkozy and Hollande is no choice"

Antifascism has been surpassed. Anti-colonialism has dissolved. What remains is the probability of living in this country without clashes. As can be seen in what people write on the internet, we still have a long way ahead of us, it is rather a civil conflict which subtly announces itself. So, awaiting the awakening of the Muslims of France concerning the necessity of being rooted in this country which is ours, the beneficial and memorable transcending of what limits us, I invite militant anti-colonialists to do away with their antifascist and antiracist hysteria, to instead occupy themselves with marriage, children and cooking for your spouse. This is not a matter of machismo, but a fundamental question. Do they count on raising their children in the hatred for France and its “sous-chiens”? And concerning those who wish to vent themselves through the ballots, there is but one symbolic choice. The die have been cast for us these past 50 years, let us now undermine the UMPS game by launching the daughter of the father into the second round.

The only real choice in the second round, is having a choice. Choosing between Sarkozy and Hollande is no choice, so let us try Marine! We can accomplish that those who are supposed to hate the Front National the most, double the score of her father in 2007!

Let us for once make the political and media caste panic in such a way that will resonate as a sweet revenge on this system which positions itself paradoxically hateful towards Islam yet pandering to illegals. No advice or electoral support makes sense today. So, let us try Marine, despite everything, despite her Islamophobia, despite her Zionism, let us try despite everything! Let us try insolence, this is our sole choice in order to have a second round, the undeniable feeling this time we have chosen instead of having been chosen for!

-Albert Ali
Founder of the Coalition of Islamic Sovereignists.

[1] translator’s note: a Euro-critical politician from the Gaullist party “Debout La République”
[2] A French department with a high proportion of immigrant families
[3] Majeed Al Alawi, Minister of Labor in Bahrain. Arab News, October 2007.
[4] The fitra ( فِطْرة ) is an Arab notion which refers to the primordial nature of man in Islam.
[5] Sûrah 9:13, 30:20

Posted in Current Events, SocietyComments (0)

An alliance between Muslims and the European ‘Far Right’? – Part 1

Note from the Editors: This article originally appeared in French under the title “Osons Marine?” on the website of Albert Ali, a French-Muslim writer as a response to the President of the Muslim Collective of France.  The latter had made statements warning Muslims against voting for the “Far Right” party Front National in the upcoming French Election.  Ali, on the other hands believes that a more productive route might be to influence French nationalists to drop electoral Islamophobia, thus opening the path to collaboration with European conservatives.

It should be noted here that all the content and ideas here are solely those of Mr. Albert Ali, and they are presented here in the interest of making his ideas accessible to an English-speaking audience.

The article was translated by Thierry Vanroy, a Belgian blogger and edited by William van Nostrand and Ray Wilson, and is to be published in two parts.  A short note from the translator follows.

Note from the Translator:  In recent years, the bankruptcy of the traditional Left, Right and their respective alliances has become clear. The coming multipolar world will see entirely new post-ideological currents. There are many signs of what is to come in this respect. One of the most debated topics is “the Muslim Question” which for now still suffers from a total disconnect, especially in the West.

As a nationalist living in ‘Europe’, I find this a matter of extreme importance. We share the same continent and our fate is to be either intertwined by freedom or subdued by the unipolar ideology of the West. Interestingly, as clear evidence of changing times, some Muslims in France have been on the forefront of a very peculiar trend upon which I would like to elaborate.

However, I am not Muslim, nor am I French, so I cannot speak for Muslims, or Frenchmen.  That’s something politicians do (both Left and Right). Fortunately, I do understand French.  What better way is there than translating an article from a French Muslim?

Please mind, this is not an isolated anomaly. There is an increasing number of articles, books and organizations out there which share the same point of view.

One final note, this is written from a French perspective.  Although I have tried to explain the peculiarities, not everyone might understand some of the specifically French context.  That being said, what follows are not my words, but I hope it offers some insight into changing times.

Osons Marine? – A Reply to the president of the Muslim Collective of France.


My dearest Nabil, I would like to reply to your worries about the sympathy some Muslims have for the Front National.

I. Historical self-criticism: 

Marine Le Pen

As a former student of the political and social sciences at Sciences-Po, you should be familiar with our social and historical situation.  The movement you preside over has a history and nearly all its militant cadres come from an engaged past, especially from the Far Left (syndicalism, the Green, the New Anti-capitalist Party, etc.)

Before I tackle the case of Marine Le Pen, allow me to take a critical look at your militant system, founded on an alliance with and using the analysis of the Left.

You have been a student of theology, so you know there is in fact no entity in French politics which coincides completely with Islamic ethics. This means to us, that every choice, from the Far Left to the Far Right, is a concession. If we admit it is a viable option to support the current democratic “game” – which remains to be seen – then every choice is valid and based on more-or-less acceptable terms. However, such terms have repeatedly been determined by the author and his personal, subjective take on reality. Thus, one can make the “Islamic” case for any party. It has already been proven how Leftist Muslims and the likes find themselves torn in their position between the Left and the Far Right, where it is in fact the latter which tends to defend the values of Muslims and Islam.

Thus, we might be inclined to say that it is but a small dive into the swamp of the social leftists before we find ourselves surrounded by the stench of the Far Right.

At the beginning of your letter, you state, “Muslims who are inclined to vote for the Front National (FN) ignore the past”.  The same thing can also be said about those who sympathize with the Far Left, despite its “diversity”. We urge you to have the courage to see both the Left’s past as well as its present for what they are.  The societal breakdown caused by the Left is apparent to any Muslim, as has always been the case of those whose point of view is at odds with tradition and morality. None of us, with our traditional values, can have much sympathy with the values of the Left, especially given the context of the undeniable past and the formation of our identity. Who among us can accept gay marriage and adoption?   Who can accept libertine marriage and the collapse of the family or the anarchistic attitude towards order and discipline or the hatred for Jesus Christ and the insults aimed towards his Holy Mother or the militant atheism all the way into the schools and the denial of that which is sacred?

Have you seen the Leftists in Bordeaux who came to disturb the prayers of Traditionalist Catholics, because those Catholics opposed abortion? Are you aware of the insults of those Leftists were spouting against the Holy Virgin Mary, mother of Jesus? Why is there no Islamic representative who condemns abortion on demand — turned into a lifestyle by the Left — which today is wreaking havoc on Muslim youths? Where were the we, when we should have stood up against repulsive pseudo-art that insulted Jesus Christ?  Why have we for 20 years already, allowed such concessions? How can we sit together and act together with the dishonorable militants of a lobby which sees pedophilia as a value of society? Why have Muslims conceded to the defenders of gay marriage, while being aware of the story of Lot as related to us in the Quran [1] ?

If talking about the Front National and its supposed wartime acts of torture sickens us, then why are we not also sickened by those people who admit on television to have had sexual acts with children in the name of progress? Is the leniency towards those who have praised pedophilia and who have tried to instill their values onto French society, supposed to make people take Leftist Muslims seriously? (translator: the author is talking about the Algerian war, this is a recurring theme in the article)

How are we to believe that, by supporting those who have tried to make sexuality at a tender age “acceptable”, as said by a former minister, Leftist Muslims can be turned into credible political actors?

How can one not be saddened by the sight of how our France has decayed through half a century of usurpation, agitation and fitna?  Why have we not been angry when even 10 year old children can nowadays – thanks to the brand “Tammy” – walk around in lewd clothing?  (Editor’s note: “Tammy” was a British retailer which targeted young teens and preteens.)

How are we to forge an alliance with the princes and masters of the fasâd [2], which praises drug use and group sex, in defiance of the Quran?

When we speak of moral priorities, which is worse in terms of fasâd? The planned destruction of the family, the support for drugs, sexual promiscuity and insults towards Christ and his Holy Mother, or the rejection of mass immigration and emphasizing job security for all French? Let’s be clear:  What can we expect from the social engineering of the Left and the Far Left which – without having had time or power on its side – has thoroughly transformed France ever since May 1968, giving us this society in which excesses have become the rule?

Is this the future we want for our France? Should imams nevertheless take part in “Gay Pride” with a pink djellaba and an ultraviolet turban? If this spirit of lenience continues, this will be the end result: instead of imams warning against the “gay attitude,” imams clamoring for “gay pride,” complete with halal (sic) gay marriage!

II. Concerning Nazism, the inhumane and the praising of colonial revisionism:

You state: ”The Front National has its roots in a history that glorifies the sulfrous Vichy regime and the darkest pages of the history of France”. It deplores how the Front National has many nostalgic to the French empire, or at the very least admirers of Vichy and Nazism.

I know that at Sciences-Po, you were taught that ”Work, Family, Country” was the epitome of fascism. As a small reminder, in Islam, work is categorized as a cultural activity, an act of ‘ibâdah (worship), just like prayer, whilst Family has been a fundamental of Creation ever since Adam and Eve.  Concerning “country,” the “land of our fathers” has been passed on through Divine Volition to those who deserve it. Could such a thing symbolize fascism or horror?  This is not intended to claim that Hitler was better al-Ḥajjāj bin Yūsuf, or that National Socialism is in itself a theology, but I would nevertheless like to distance myself from categorizations instilled onto us by the system.

Why should we, descendants of post-colonial immigration, support this eternal squealing of the Left, this permanent antifascist twaddle, to mirror our minds to categorizations which are in fact not ours?

The history of European fascism is a history where we, as the “new French,” are complete strangers to. Why should we subject ourselves to such backtracking logic or the political use of intra-European history? Should there have been Nazi sympathizers and French collaborators, then we should also ask ourselves why in the beginning of the previous century the Ottoman Empire, at the end of its lifespan, felt itself compelled to support the Germans. And why, 30 years later, the Mufti of Jerusalem met Hitler and founded Muslim units in the Balkans? If we forgive one side, we should understand the other. Do we know what kind of choices we had to make should we have conquered this period in time? History is complex and dependent on such a myriad of factors, we should constantly be revising it. Getting back in touch with history is also risking anachronism. Therefore, let us start with the revision of our own familial and colonial history. Underlining the crimes of one side should lead us to investigating the unfortunate Harkis (translator: Algerians in the French army) who, 50 years since the end of the war in Algeria, are still our Muslim brothers, no matter what we say. They deserve to not just be cast away as is the case today. Cultivating hatred when we come across these people is not a part of our traditions.  Eternal revenge is not a part of the Sunnah!

The reconciliation of tomorrow is important if we are to prevent the repeated condemnation of the past.  Should we be compelled to go on with recycling the past, then let us also think of the torturings of the Harkis by the FLN ‘Mujahedin’, which were deceitfully betrayed on the order of the cowardly French government. Is this how the Prophet (swt) commands us to tread POWs?  As far as torture goes they excelled far above the inventors the Gégène[3], as if to say that the Americans were mistaken by delocalising their torture chambers outside of Arab countries! Concerning French Muslims, there is more common ground – maṣlaha [4] – to work towards the reconciliation with the Harkis and especially their descendants, who are still alive, rather than conjuring up memories of the fallen victims, so as to contemplate once more on the military past of certain cadres of the Front National.

When will we stop perpetually follow the media’s rhythm, which opportunistically and incessantly replays the sad history of the FN? When will we free ourselves from the system’s categorizations, so we will finally become autonomous? We would like to hear about the antifascist associations of Muslims and about the Vichyism of the father of the Left, supported and massively voted for by Muslims with the presidential elections of 1981 (translator: Mitterrand). It would – politically speaking – be much more sensible than focusing on French militaries, straw men on Algerian soil. So if we are to look back at history, let us do so from a critical perspective and starting from our own past, so we can then do away with the myths and lay bare the necessary nuances.

To be Continued here


[1] The Qur’an, Sûrah 7, Verses 80-82
[2] An Arabic term denoting corruption or social disorder.
[3] French military term designating an electric generator whose primary use is to power field telephones. The gegene was used to torture people by applying the electrodes to circulate an electric current between various body parts.
[4] An Arabic term roughly translated as “social welfare”.  It is invoked to prohibit or permit something on the basis of whether or not it serves the public’s benefit or welfare.

Posted in Current Events, Europe, Most Recent, Politics, ReligionComments (0)

    Leave a Comment

  • Stay up to date

  • Subscribe to the RSS feed
  • Subscribe to the feed via email
  • Follow us on Twitter!

Find us on Facebook

Traditionalist Books

More books...