Marine Le Pen Challenges CNN on “Far-right” Label

By Selwyn Duke

A jockey will appear a giant in a land of Lilliputians, an ordinary face will be thought beauty in a tribe of beasts — and anything will seem “far right” to CNN. One person who might agree with this, too, after being interviewed on the network, is French politician Marine Le Pen.

Le Pen, now a figurehead of her country’s National Rally (NR) party, recently pushed back on CNN interviewer Christiane Amanpour after the latter described her party as “far right” and “very scary.” Of course, it’s standard for mainstream media to characterize anyone or anything more “conservative” than itself as “far right.”

In the interview, Amanpour noted that along with NR, Giorgia Meloni’s party in Italy and Germany’s AfD did well in the European elections. She then told Le Pen that “as you know, a little bit like the former National Front [NR’s erstwhile name],” the AfD “is very scary.”

At this point Le Pen could have asked, “Scary to whom?” Certainly not to NR’s and AfD’s many millions of supporters. The Frenchwoman didn’t ask, however, and Amanpour proceeded to inquire about the changes in Europe that were empowering the “far right.”

Le Pen then did push back. “First of all,” she said, “I strongly dispute the term ‘far right,’” which in your country refers to small groups that are extremely radical and violent…. The equivalent of what we are in the United States is between the center-right and the center-left with regards to ideas.”

Amanpour at this point interjected and, appearing genuinely surprised, said “You’re kidding me, right?”

Undeterred, Le Pen stated, “I think this use of the term ‘far right’ carries a stigma and is very pejorative. It does not correspond to what we are, and not at all to what the far right is in the United States.” This is where the clip (below) ends — but not where the explanation should.

(Note: The above doesn’t include Amanpour’s “very scary” remark; that’s found here.)

Consider that the same media loosely labeling anything more conservative than Jacobin magazine “far right” never seem to find anyone deserving of the title “far left.” This includes avowed socialists such as Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). These media apparently believe the far left died with Stalin and Mao.

Left and Right

Interestingly, though, Marine Le Pen might know more about the relevant terminology than most do as the political senses of the labels “right” and “left” originated in her nation — during the French Revolution. That is, those seated on their National Assembly’s right side, the monarchists, were the “rightists”; those on the left side, the republicans, were the “leftists.”

Perhaps what’s “scary” here is that Amanpour was truly incredulous at Le Pen’s claim about NR’s idea-defined centrism. For it isn’t opinion. It’s fact.

Sure, NR does favor immigration limitations and opposes Islamization (populist views, do note). But the party is officially “pro-choice” on abortion, just like left-wing Amanpour. (In fact, NR voted to make prenatal infanticide a “constitutional right.”) NR appears to generally support France’s universal healthcare system, just like Amanpour. And in general, the party is accepting of statist norms, just like Amanpour. Why, even left-leaning Wikipedia, citing French philosopher Pierre-André Taguieff’s work, writes that NR comprises “national populists” and combines “the social values of the left and the political values of the right.”

“But do ‘positions’ make an entity ‘right’ or ‘left’?” some may counter. “After all, rightists were monarchists during the French Revolution and leftists were small-r republicans, and now that just seems bizarre. The designations relate to different positions in different times and places. Here’s reality: NR may not be ‘right-wing’ in America, but it sure is in France.”

“Right” and “left” reference different points on the political spectrum. As the spectrum changes, so do the positions associated with the descriptors. But who determines the spectrum?

The Political Spectrum

A top CNN-interview commenter at MSN put it well. “It’s no longer the ‘Far-Right’, as the author calls them,” he wrote. “They are the centrist party now because the majority of the people support their policies. The voters have made liberals the ‘Far-Left’ party.” Bingo.

The people determine the spectrum.

Whether or not the “majority” supports NR’s policies, enough Frenchmen do so that it’s a mainstream party. In fact, only far-left entities can become dominant despite embracing radicalism. Why?

Because the media market them so that many people don’t know what they truly stand for — and hence what they’re voting for.

As for the world’s Amanpours, their shock at the truth Marine Le Pen articulated is explained by elitism and/or lack of self-awareness. Intensely solipsistic, they behave as if they and their pseudo-elite bubble of co-ideologists determine the political spectrum. Thus, anything notably more conservative than they are, which is most everything, considered “far right.”

Missed here, however, is that everyone is getting lost in a cloudy sea of relativism-born political terminology. What matters is not right and left, but right and wrong. France has a runoff election on Sunday. Its three viable choices are actually partially wrong, mostly wrong, and all wrong. And if the voters were wise, they’d choose not based on where the parties stand on the political spectrum, but where they stand relative to the unchanging, universal, and eternal: Truth.

                   This article was originally published at The New American.