Tag: history

French Far-Left Leader Claims ‘White, Christian’ France Never Existed

A leading leftist in the National Assembly has claimed that France was never a white and Christian country, and that the idea is merely a “fantasy” of the so-called far-right.

Mathilde Panot, who leads Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s La France Insoumise (France in Rebellion/LFI) party in the lower house of the French parliament, not only championed the idea of a “New France” but appeared to suggest that Old France never actually existed.

Speaking to Le Média, the MP for Val-de-Marne’s 10th constituency said that it is imperative for the political left to “never concede anything whatsoever to the far right” as it is through the acceptance of premises through which the “far right becomes socially acceptable”.

Despite Christian heritage in France dating back to the 5th century with the conversion of Clovis I, she claimed that the right “fantasises about a France that does not exist and has never existed… a France that is supposedly a ‘white’ France, a ‘Christian’ France… a France being ‘invaded’ by—well, by who knows whom. In short, they are completely lost in a fantasy regarding the true nature of this country.”

“The only way to defeat the far right is to remain steadfast in one’s principles and refuse to yield even an inch to them regarding issues of racism, immigration, and—well—all such matters. Anyone who actually cedes ground to them is, in effect, helping them advance every single time—because, by doing so, they are effectively playing right into the far right’s ideological framework,” Panot continued.

The LFI leader made the comments in reference to a growing consensus across the political spectrum against mass migration into France, with fellow leftist leaders such as François Ruffin, who was formerly in the same party as Panot, coming out last month in favour of limiting the influx of foreigners to protect the wages of French workers.

Keep reading

Conservative Journalist SCHOOLS Vile Democrat Pollster with a Very Important History Lesson After He Launches Smear Against America’s Founding Fathers

A young conservative writer delivered a powerful lesson to a nasty Democrat hack regarding the U.S. Constitution and America’s Founders on Friday during a discussion on CNN over musicians bailing on President Trump’s concert celebrating America’s 250th birthday.

As TGP readers may know, several musical artists have been withdrawing from the US Freedom 250 concert under pressure from left-wing activists. The artists dropping out include luminaries such as Martina McBride, The Commodores, and Bret Michaels.

Freedom 250, which was launched last year by the Trump administration, has scheduled events across America to celebrate the nation’s semi-quincentennial.

National Review columnist Caroline Downey astutely explained that the reason it is so hard to bring people together on both sides is that those on the left don’t think America’s Founding Fathers were among the world’s most brilliant visionaries.

Democrat pollster Joshua Doss proved her point by quickly smearing the likes of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as nothing but immoral slave owners. Downey fired back by pointing out that the Constitution set up a method to undo the evil of slavery.

Americans ended up fighting the bloodiest war in our nation’s history to end the practice.

Doss could only play dumb when confronted with this damning truth, while Downey tried to drill it through his thick skull.

Keep reading

Three Debates Americans Have Had For 250 Years

George Washington rode west from Philadelphia in command of 13,000 troops on a mission that would test his leadership unlike any previous campaign.

These men were not soldiers in the Continental Army. They were citizen militiamen—forerunners of the National Guard—called up from Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and New Jersey. And Washington was no longer simply a general. He was president of the United States.

The year was 1794, and Washington had made one of the most fateful decisions of his presidency: to use armed force against fellow Americans.

Congress, desperate for revenue to pay war debts, had enacted a tax on whiskey. Grain farmers in Western Pennsylvania saw the tax as immoral and unjust.

Protestors attacked revenue agents, destroyed the property of tax-paying farmers, and fired shots that killed a local militiaman.

Growing bolder, they fashioned banners on “liberty poles” with slogans like “Equal Taxation and no Excise” and “Liberty or Death.”

For two years, Washington searched for a peaceful resolution. But when 5,000 rebels gathered outside Pittsburgh, vowing to take the city, he knew the time for action had come.

In the end, the Whiskey Rebellion was anticlimactic, resulting in no further violence.

Yet more than 200 years later, Americans still strenuously disagree on basic questions of government.

When is a president justified in mobilizing the National Guard? At what point does a protest become an insurrection? What counts as free speech?

Some fundamental issues were settled at the nation’s founding, a panel of scholars told The Epoch Times. But more were left unsettled. And Americans continue to debate those same issues today.

Keep reading

House Democrats Unanimously Vote Against Women’s History Museum… Can You Guess Why?

House Democrats unanimously voted this week against legislation to build a new women’s history museum on the National Mall.

The reason was an amendment that limited the exhibits to biological women to the exclusion of transgender figures.

The museum failed 204-216 as House Democrats hoped that they could still secure a museum including transgender figures once they retake power after the midterm elections.

The amendment drafted by Rep. Mary Miller, R-Ill., states in part, “The Museum shall be dedicated to preserving, researching, and presenting the history, achievements and lived experiences of biological women in the United States.”

It further mandated that the museum would not depict “any biological male as female.”

The vote was notable after the release of the DNC “autopsy” report that flagged how transgender and identity politics contributed to the defeat in the last election.

The report specifically noted the success of Trump’s “Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you” ad.

The report noted that “If the Vice President would not change her position — and she did not — then there was nothing which would have worked as a response.”

The fact that this was a unanimous vote among Democratic members is particularly notable and suggests that transgender issues will remain a rallying point for the Democrats.

Democratic members called the exclusion a “poison pill” amendment.

In the meantime, transgender issues continue to occupy the courts with a major decision by the Colorado Supreme Court this week that ordered Colorado’s largest provider of gender-affirming care for young people to resume medical treatments like puberty blockers and hormone therapy.

That puts  Children’s Hospital Colorado in direct conflict with the Department of Health and Human Services, which has moved to block federal support for institutions providing such care.

Justice William Wood III wrote that “We conclude that the actual immediate and irreparable harm to petitioners outweighs the speculative harm CHC may face if the federal government further acts against it.”

In his dissent, Justice Brian Boatright said that this was hardly a speculative matter, but “a decision driven by the direct threat to the viability of the entire hospital.”

Here is the opinion: Boe v. Child.’s Hosp. Colo.

Keep reading

The Strait of Hormuz: A Constant in Iranian History

The strategic and spiritual resonance of the Strait of Hormuz is deeply woven into Iran’s identity. It represents a profound geographic constant in Iranian history. This narrow waterway has served as a central artery for Persian political and economic power, historical consciousness and culture across millennia.

Whether safeguarding Zoroastrian trade routes under the Sassanids, expelling European powers in the Safavid era, or commanding energy routes today, Iran’s geopolitical identity is fused with this narrow stretch of water.  It is a physical manifestation of sovereignty, insuring that the “Passage of the Palm Groves” and its divine namesake “Ahura Mazda” remains a focal point of global history.

Linguists and historians trace the etymology of “Hormuz” to “Ohrmazd,” the Middle Persian derivation of “Ahura Mazda” (the supreme deity of Zoroastrianism). To ancient Persian monarchs, this body of water was more than a trade route; it was an extension of the imperial cosmic divine order.

In the ancient dialect of southern Iran, the name is believed to have evolved from “Hur-Mogh.”  In the local tongue of Hormozgan, Hur means waterway and Mogh refers to palm trees.  For people who lived there for millennia, the strait was not a military chokepoint, it was simply, “The Passage of the Palm Groves.”

The Strait of Hormuz presents a profound historical paradox. Its name honors the Zoroastrian source of cosmic harmony, Ahura Mazda. Yet today, this narrow chokepoint whose foundational ethos, “humata, hukhta, and huvarshta” (good thoughts, good words, and good deeds), is now the epicenter of severe international geopolitical friction and trade instability.

Long before it became the jugular vein of the modern global economy, the Strait of Hormuz was the sacred and strategic maritime gateway to the Persian empire.

The Achaemenid Empire, founded by Cyrus the Great in 550 BC, was the first imperial power to recognize the strait as a strategic artery to be owned.  Its name is tied to the Sassanian dynasty (224-651 CE), the last great pre-Islamic Persian empire and initiator of Zoroastrianism as a state religion.

During the Sassanian era, its Zoroastrian rulers expanded outward from the Iranian plateau to dominate both the northern and southern shores of the strait.

By commanding the entrance to the Persian Gulf by constructing forts and coastal infrastructure, these ancient kings secured their control over the lucrative maritime trade routes, linking Mesopotamia, the Indian subcontinent and the broader world.

Keep reading

How the Slaveholding Founders Really Felt About Slavery

The Declaration of Independence accused the king and Parliament of Great Britain of “exciting domestic insurrections” among the half-million people enslaved in the American colonies. This was a reference to the November 1775 proclamation by Virginia’s royal governor, Lord Dunmore, that he would free “all indentured servants, Negroes, or others, (appertaining to rebels)” who were “able and willing to bear arms” against the American revolutionaries.

Today’s readers often consider it hypocritical that the Founders denounced Britain for offering black Americans the same freedom for which they were themselves fighting. Some of the revolutionary era’s readers thought the same thing. In 1776, the London writer John Lind published a pamphlet responding line by line to the Declaration, and in it he ridiculed the patriots: “Is it for them to complain of the offer of freedom held out to these wretched beings? of the offer of reinstating them in that equality which, in this very paper, is declared to be the gift of God to all?“

What Lind overlooked was that Americans did not deny that it was self-contradictory for them to hold slaves while proclaiming liberty to be every person’s birthright. On the contrary, their embarrassment over that inconsistency had been particularly glaring when Virginians drafted their Declaration of Rights in June 1776. Thomas Jefferson went even further, admitting that slaves were justified in violently rebelling against their oppressors. The thought that God’s “justice cannot sleep forever” made him “tremble,” he said.

But the real story of the “domestic insurrections” passage is more complicated than modern readers typically realize. The best point to begin understanding it is October 1769, when a poor man named Samuel Howell approached Jefferson, then a 26-year-old lawyer practicing in Williamsburg, to ask for help in defending his freedom against the claim that he was a slave.

Howell’s great-grandfather was a black man who’d had a baby girl with a white woman. Under Virginia laws of that time, the daughter was bound to servitude until the age of 31, and during those years, she gave birth to Howell’s mother. She, too, was enslaved until the age of 31, and during that time, she gave birth to Howell himself. The owner of Howell’s mother and grandmother, thinking that Virginia law also rendered Howell a slave until the age of 31, then sold him.

Keep reading

Spanberger Rips Up Confederate Heritage To Separate Virginians From Their History

Seemingly not content to just destroy her state’s rule of law and election system, Democrat Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger has declared war on Virginia’s heritage and, more specifically, those who dedicate themselves to preserving it.

The newly minted governor signed a bill on Monday that revoked tax exemptions from several Confederate heritage organizations, including the state’s divisions of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC). Spanberger also recently signed a bill that ceases the production of specialty license plates bearing the likeness of Robert E. Lee.

“Governor Spanberger’s signing of this bill is a proud moment and an important step forward for Virginia,” state Delegate Alex Askew, who sponsored the bill and has campaigned for it for several years, stated. But the question is: A step forward toward what? A Virginia that hates its own history, that curses those men of the past who built the state and made it what it is today?

Spanberger’s signature represents, as The New York Times put it, part of “a yearslong Democrat-led push to shake off the state’s legacy as the capital of the 11 Southern, slaveholding states that seceded from the country in the 1860s.”

And indeed it has been a years-long campaign by the left to erase Virginia’s, and America’s, history. The era that began with the inauguration of President Barack Obama in 2009 and reached its fever pitch during the fiery George Floyd riots of summer 2020 saw the slow but sure disappearance of Confederate history from the public sphere. Even some Republican politicians found a convenient scapegoat in long-revered Southern symbols.

During a BLM riot in Richmond, Virginia, in May 2020, extremist agitators attacked the headquarters of the United Daughters of the Confederacy with “incendiary devices.” The building, deeded to the organization by the state in 1950, was filled with countless Civil War-era documents and artifacts. The resulting fire and destruction caused $4.1 million in damage to the building and its contents, according to a lawsuit filed by the UDC. The wanton vandalism that night also extended to the multiple Confederate monuments on Monument Avenue, including the famous equestrian statue of Robert E. Lee that was removed in 2021.

The UDC was founded by Southern women in 1894 to “honor their family members and ancestors who served in the Confederate military or contributed to the Southern war effort.” And because of this, Virginia’s Democrats seek to strike back for the sin of honoring their ancestors through charitable work. The new law is intended to cripple an organization that mostly dedicates itself these days to civic engagement of a decidedly nonpolitical sort — helping homeless shelters and food banks.

And, of course, the radical leftists didn’t stop at Confederate monuments. Statues and memorials to the Founding Fathers, Christopher Columbus, and Teddy Roosevelt all came under attack during the heyday of race wokeness. Many of the memorials and museums that escaped physical attack were otherwise “contextualized” into oblivion with asides and nitpicks that drilled into patrons’ heads that America’s ancestors were very bad people.

Keep reading

Leftists Are Big Mad The Education Department Is Teaching Kids American History

“History Rocks!,” a national tour led by Education Secretary Linda McMahon to honor our nation’s 250th anniversary, is expressly being promoted as a nonpartisan celebration of American greatness. Even The Washington Post has admitted that “there is no evidence that the events themselves push a political message.” And yet “parents, students and teachers” have reportedly taken issue with the tour because it enjoys sponsorship from conservative and religious organizations, leading to the cancellation of several History Rocks! events.

This left-wing backlash to History Rocks! demonstrates how deeply the left has been corrupted by an ideology that is opposed to celebrations of our nation that only a few decades ago would have elicited practically unanimous approval across America.

A Left-Wing Double Standard Over American History

One outspoken senior at a high school in Alabama described History Rocks! as “hypocritical,” because it was “very publicly supported by strongly political groups.” Similarly, after learning that an elementary school in Fairfield, Connecticut, was going to host History Rocks!, a parent voiced her displeasure to the superintendent, claiming the tour was “backed by right-wing extremist groups.” A few hours later, the district canceled the event … because of its connection to groups like The Heritage Foundation and Turning Point USA.

Meanwhile a superintendent in Massachusetts dramatically declared that her district wouldn’t participate in any event related to Turning Point. Even after the Education Department explained to the superintendent that Turning Point “was not involved in the program,” the Post reported, the official canceled the previously scheduled event. Protesters in Illinois in turn held up signs that read, “Keep hate out of our schools,” and “education not indoctrination.” The New York Times featured a mocking op-ed proclaiming, “Linda McMahon is shocked — shocked! — that there’s been a backlash to the Department of Education’s ‘History Rocks!’ tour.”

What’s actually shocking about the dustup over “extremist groups” such as Heritage and Turning Point is that we heard no complaints from such persons as the curriculum of the 1619 Project spread to more than 4,000 schools six years ago. That curriculum promotes an unapologetically leftist and racialist version of American history, claiming, as The Heritage Foundation detailed, that America was founded in order to perpetuate slavery and that there was “no tension, no debate, no struggle” over the institution at the founding. Some of the most well-respected historians in the nation have severely criticized the project. Its brainchild, purported journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones, once claimed “the white race … is the biggest murderer, rapist, pillager, and thief of the modern world.”

What History Rocks! Is Actually Promoting

As The Washington Post readily acknowledged, the events for History Rocks! usually feature Secretary McMahon or another member of the Education Department speaking briefly, as well as a quiz on history. “Speeches provided by the Education Department and local coverage of the events suggest the events are a nonpartisan celebration of America and its origins,” the Post admitted. A review of the Department’s website shows absolutely nothing expressly partisan about the program.

“Some have tried to brand this tour as ‘radical,’ ‘dangerous’ and ‘partisan indoctrination.’ How absurd,” reads a statement from McMahon. “What you see is not politics — it is a shared commitment to our nation’s story. It speaks volumes about certain voices in our society that they would seek to distort a celebration of America’s 250th anniversary and deprive children of this experience.”

To prove McMahon’s point, a school member in Wisconsin went to a History Rocks! event and “found it inoffensive but also ‘very shallow.’” She asserted that the trivia questions were “kind of elementary, ” and she questioned whether “students learned anything that the school had not already taught them.”

I wouldn’t be so sure about that. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in 2022 determined that only 22 percent of eighth graders were proficient in civics and another 31 percent were deemed below basic, unprecedentedly low numbers. A 2024 survey by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation discovered that 70 percent of respondents couldn’t pass a “basic civic literacy quiz” that covered the three branches of government. Only about half of respondents “were able to correctly name the branch of government where bills become laws.” At this point, even basic refreshers about the author of the Declaration of Independence or the First Amendment are probably necessary for grade-schoolers.

Keep reading

The long history of the UK deep state and some of its activities

The UK deep state (UK/DS) goes back centuries, as does “democratic” government in the UK – although this website focuses on its post-WWII history. Credit for the early 20th century history below is largely due to Carroll Quigley‘s masterful exposé, The Anglo-American Establishment. Later history is derived from many different sources. In 2018-19, the Integrity Initiative leaks shone a spotlight onto some of the workings of the modern UK deep state. The group was officially wound up in 2023 after Russia formally declared it an undesirable organisation, but its members continue to show up, highlighting the ability of deep state operatives to outlive particular deep state factions.

Keep reading

Epsteins, Rothschilds Funded Hitler’s Shelter? Email Exchange Between Jeffrey Epstein and Ariane De Rothschild Show

More names have since appeared in the newly released batch of files related to the investigation of the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Amongst the files is an email conversation between Epstein and banker Ariane de Rothschild about how Hitler lived in a shelter funded by the Epstein and Rothschild families.

In a post by commentator Adam on X, a screenshot of an email conversation between Epstein and Rothschild dated 31 December 2018 shows the two talking about how Hitler lived in a shelter that was funded by three wealthy Jewish families during his early days. Rothschild seemed to find this information, which she described as a ‘conspiracy theory’, as ‘pathetic’. Epstein seemed to reply that it was true.

The Email Exchange

‘I thought you’d find amusing that in a Harvard class on Hitler they told the story of when he was so poor he lived in a shelter for the homeless and destitute..that had been financed by the three wealthy families…the Gutmanns the Epsteins and the Rothschilds. It turns out to be accurate,’ said Epstein.

‘Whether it’s a way to say that generosity is not rewarded or that the conspiracy theory still exists is quite pathetic…’ Rothschild responded, signing her name at the bottom of her reply.

‘First it turns out to be 100 per cent true, Hitler was selling his clothes and artwork and living in a shelter funded by Jews. Epstein, Rothschild, and Gutman. No conspiracy, the Epsteins were the Vienna bankers, bought their bank on the ring hence still Palais Epstein,’ the convicted financier responded.

Epstein-Rothschild Business Ties

The relationship between the late disgraced financier and Rothschild also extended to business ties. In a document dated 5 October 2015, Epstein, through his Southern Trust Company Inc., signed an agreement with the Rothschild Group worth £18.2 million ($25 million). The agreement was for providing a risk analysis and algorithm-related services, with Epstein identified as the president of Southern Trust, based in the US Virgin Islands.

The document details a ‘Letter of Agreement’ between the company and the Edmond de Rothschild Holding SA, which Ariane de Rothschild represents. The agreement between the two came years after Epstein had already pleaded guilty in Florida for sex crimes in 2008. Epstein’s business ties and the people he is known to have engaged with have since come under renewed scrutiny, especially as millions of files related to the investigation were released by the Justice Department.

Epstein died in 2019 after he was found dead in his jail cell in New York City, awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. The disgraced financier’s alleged victims said he ran a sex trafficking network that was used by wealthy and powerful people, some of whose names were redacted in the files.

Keep reading