English translation of the French transcript, made with AI and not yet proofread — click a paragraph to jump to it. Show the French original
Right and left: Pagani refuses to oppose people 0:00 Dominique Pagani is giving me a hard time. So, if you want to understand everything, I'd made a video about Dominique Pagani who had recalled something important, namely that the left-right divide is still relevant today. And he'd even said, those who deny it don't know it, but I tell them, they're on the right. And I'd connected that to Chaigneau, who says today that the left-right divide is no longer relevant, that today it's the divide between the homeland, the nation, and the globalists.
0:38 So we're going to try to look at the criticism made of my highlighting, let's say, of the difference between him and Loïc Chaigneau. You'll see. Usually I say, right, I give the name, the pseudonym of course, of whoever asks the question. I read the question. But here, since it's a question that comes up often in a considerable number of interventions, comments, I'll identify it more by its category or as a title—it's everyone who asks me, what do you think of the right and the left? Does it still make sense? Isn't it outdated?
1:23 Or others who say, yes, yes, Pagani is right to say there's a right and a left. You see this discussion taking on huge proportions, at least on TV panel shows most of the time. And I'll take the opportunity, because I was a bit annoyed to see a video where I don't know the people or the organization. So I say this, maybe it's me. Maybe also there was the channel on the left that had put Dominique Pagani, thingy, versus Loïc Chaigneau, so it could be our two videos that are in there, but I know he watches my videos a bit, sometimes he comments as Dominique Pagani, so it's possible it was me
2:04 who produced it, but I was a bit annoyed—I'm not talking about the content, I can say, I respect all... and I even appreciate all these efforts of reflection and all attempts to answer this kind of problem. But what I didn't like is that I try not to attack people. Now, there I saw people trying to stir up a fight, in particular between Loïc Chaigneau and myself. So I'll say it very simply, right? Yes, because people say, Loïc Chaigneau says there's no more left and right, and Pagani says the opposite, Pagani contradicts Loïc Chaigneau.
Reading of the article "Pour une renaissance conservatrice" 2:39 There are some who only remember that, the war of it. So I'll be precise. In quotes, I often joke around, but I completely understand that Dominique Pagani doesn't want to be used as a tool. All this, moreover, I think has something to do with a personal relationship he has with Loïc Chaigneau. That is to say, today, Loïc Chaigneau, I consider him to be totally adrift. We saw it in his latest article. In fact, I don't even know if I've released the clip yet. Maybe not yet. But there, the latest article called 'For a Conservative Renaissance' by Aurélien Baleur on the IHT, which explains for example that the real movement is no longer communism, but is called nationalism today.
3:15 I mean, that's a bit much, isn't it, where they take up all the truly fascist terminology, where they explain that nature becomes something very important. The return to nature, the return to the nation. It's become something really extremely reactionary for me, the Institut Homme Total and what Loïc Chaigneau is doing. But that doesn't stop us from laughing about it, Dominique Pagani, what I understand is, he's known Loïc Chaigneau for 10-15 years.
3:45 He may be attached to Loïc. Besides, maybe he's someone very nice. I don't know. I don't know him. And so, as a friend, I can understand that Dominique Pagani is attached to him. Most of the theses for which Loïc Chaigneau identifies as a communist, I share them. Yes, but... Then I don't know how closely Dominique Pagani has looked at what Loïc Chaigneau is doing right now. But really, an article that explains that the real movement is no longer communism, but nationalism.
4:17 In fact, I'm going to quote it in the text, so no one says I don't quote from the text. 'The real movement has simply changed its name. It's no longer called communism, but ecology or nationalism. This change can easily be explained by totalizing it within techno-feudalism. Capitalism has reached its exterminist stage. It's no longer the working class against the bourgeoisie, but life against death, civilization against barbarism.' I'm sorry, this text is fascist. But read the whole text. The text is fascist. The guy tells you, it's no longer the working class against the bourgeoisie, it's civilization against barbarism.
4:52 And two months ago, he was explaining to us that the problem was the Bedouins versus the settled peoples. I'm fine with it, but I get the impression that Dominique Pagani has stayed stuck with the Loïc Chaigneau of 2018, which, for me, wasn't a problem, who could have blind spots. But since I have blind spots, since Dominique Pagani does, everyone has blind spots. Who was a communist militant. Today, hosted by someone important at the IHT who writes this on his site. I'm sorry, but this is a fascist text.
5:23 I've rarely seen a text so chemically pure at the fascist level. It has everything. There's the worship of nature, of the maternal earth. The bit of conservative renaissance, a kind of conservative revolution, all that stuff. It's delirious. As such, the people is a docile being, extremely pliable, ready to endure the worst abuses. No people has ever revolted for no reason. It must feel itself in extreme danger to rise up as one man.
5:53 But if it does, it's always to restore order, to regain a sense of security. Revolution, from the point of view of the masses, is not an offensive movement, but a defensive one. How do you convince mothers and fathers, the 'real country'—the real country, that's how Charles Maurras talks—to throw themselves into what can only be perceived by them as an even greater danger? Marxists have a lot of nerve saying that communism is already there, and that consequently it is not an arbitrary projection. But in reality, revolution is indeed the reign of uncertainty.
6:25 One must be ignorant, naive, and have never acquired anything to throw oneself body and soul into the revolutionary adventure. No but I'm baffled. Honestly, I'm stunned by this stuff. That is why any successful revolution is above all conservative. Let's say it right away, we laugh in the face of leftists who will also see a reference to Pinguerin's theory of the conservative revolution. There you go, they write a totally fascist text, but they say all the same it's not fascist. No but honestly, it's delirious. Conservatism is not a revolutionary ideology. Well no, it's a conservative ideology.
6:56 But what should we seek to conserve? As indicated above, capitalism threatens to eradicate everything, nations, cultures, languages, reason, the family, in short life itself. It's a struggle for the conservation of civilization in general, and of France in particular. The guy has gone from the communist struggle, the struggle for the power of the proletariat, to the struggle for the conservation of civilization, and of France in particular. The struggle for the nation, in other words.
7:26 There's this passage too: as Enzo Traverso showed, Marx is a European cosmopolitan. You're one step away from saying Marx is a wandering Jew, this guy. He lived in several countries, notably because of exile. He therefore never had a real national attachment compared to Jaurès. Anyway, all these guys say Jaurès is superior to Marx. In general it smells a bit rotten. The truth lies mainly in the fact that at the time, national identity was taken for granted. Oh yes, of course, at the time national identity was taken for granted. There's no struggle at all against the Corsicans, against the Basques, against the Bretons, against the Alsatians, against the Auvergnats.
8:02 It was taken for granted, because from the height of his twenties, Aurélien Baleur tells us that in 2023 it seems logical to him. It's therefore normal that the question wasn't on everyone's lips in the working-class world, but to go from there to saying that workers had no national sentiment at all is a stretch. There was still the International at that time, which was created precisely with a view to international convergence of the working masses. It's the nation that gives concrete content to socialism, not the other way around.
8:45 It's a delirious text. Really delirious. I'm sorry to keep hammering this, but this text is fascist. It's some kind of half-socialist, third-way thing, saying that in fact one must be nationalist. That's why, if we must make any reference to socialism, it's never in reference to an organization, to a party, but to a people. And this people is against the Bedouins, because this people is settled. Can you imagine the level of this?
9:15 Socialism in France only makes sense as a moment in the history of France. If there is to be socialism in the 21st century, it's as an extension of a national history, which is all the more coherent in France because of its own history. But above all, this socialism must keep a low profile. It must really shut its mouth, this socialism. Really? Shut your mouth, socialism. No but it's delirious. Anyway, I'll let you read the article if you want, but it's all like that. The return to the nation, rootedness, the xenocratic character of the French bourgeoisie in power.
No left-wing cover in a debate between right and far right 9:47 You'd think it was a fascist text from the 1930s. Anyway, let's continue with Dominique. I stand with him on these points. Let that be clear. Yes, but Dominique, you stand with Loïc Chaigneau. Well, I call him Dominique, I don't know him, but with the Loïc Chaigneau of 'why I'm a communist' from 5-6 years ago. That's not the Loïc Chaigneau who tells us that the problem in France is the xenocracy, or whatever. So it's not in terms of content, despite what I read here or there, that we're opposed.
10:19 But on the other hand, it's true that we don't have the same strategies—starting from this agreement we have on content, we don't have the same strategies when it comes to disseminating that content. Yeah, but it's a question of strategy, and there's a guy who, aside from what he hosts on the site—the latest article on the site, which they're very proud of and share—there's a guy who now says, yeah, socialism must keep a low profile, it's not communism we want anymore, it's nationalism. I've never heard Dominique Pagani or Michel Clouscard tell us that nationalism is what's needed.
10:52 For example, I myself have been approached by circles that position themselves very explicitly on the right, even the far right. I didn't go. That's a difference in strategy I have with him, I respect his. Maybe it's not only necessary but even essential that there be a dialogue. But the problem isn't that he goes to the far right. I understand, I'm the first to say we should talk with the far right if we go there with the aim of confronting them, bam, bringing our arguments, and bringing people back to the left.
11:24 But going on Radio Courtoisie to denounce the 'xenocracy,' to explain to us that actually it's the homeland, the nation that's needed, and that the leftists of France Insoumise still haven't understood that—that's being a traitor, and it's playing the right's game. He's not doing judo, he doesn't come in saying, oh yeah, actually you guys on the right are idiots. He doesn't come showing them their mistake, and sort of bringing people back to the left. That's not at all what he does. This is long, isn't it?
11:55 But I don't want to serve as a left-wing alibi, at a time when political debate seems to only take place between the right and the far right anymore. Well yes, but you're right Dominique, obviously one shouldn't serve as a left-wing alibi when the political debate is between the right and the far right, but obviously! That's not what's called, in journalistic terms—you know I don't like this term—the West. Right? The West which is pretty rusty right now, sorry, that's a bad pun, but it's falling apart at the seams, isn't it?
12:25 Oxidation is rust. Rust is reddish-brown, rust, so there you go, we can read into Dominique's unconscious. Well, the machinery still works powerfully. And there, I don't respond to these overtures. Individually, yes. Me, as a private individual, I have friends across the whole political spectrum, that's not the question, I never confuse, right, a person, a human singularity, with their political opinions.
13:05 I never reduce them to that. And sometimes I feel closer, don't I, to people I disagree with, right? But that's what he should do with Loïc Chaigneau, I'd say. He has the right to be friends with Loïc Chaigneau, Dominique Pagani, but today, I'm sorry, but what Loïc is doing is unworthy, it's unworthy. Well, Clouscard said that Soral didn't represent him. Today, I think Clouscard would say the same thing about Loïc Chaigneau.
13:40 He would say, Loïc Chaigneau saw fit to associate me with these new neo-fascist theses, period, and that's it. On a whole bunch of points, even among those who are supposed to be on my side, if we can even speak of 'sides.' And I thank here our friend and comrade—a long-time subscriber and member, an old companion, who for a long time took care of our videos and still does sometimes, I'm thinking of the 'readings on the fly' series, I'm thinking of Philippe Moreau, who used to say, we're sick of trench warfare.
14:20 There you go. What is your position? Positional warfare. There you go. Ah, positional warfare, and this position revisited? You want to make this clarification, don't you, that we're not trying to divide what's already divided enough on the left of the left? It's not because I express the theory of Moses that it's me dividing the left. I mean, I can't help it, if one day, a guy who was a bit of a communist, there, who was a...
14:52 There are plenty of people, I think, who had—me too—who hoped that Loïc Chaigneau would really turn out to be a good communist and all that. He's someone who's interesting sometimes, no problem there. The thing is, that's not what happened. It wasn't me who asked him to go polish the far right's shoes on Radio Courtoisie, saying, yeah, still, the 'wokes,' it's like... Oh, the left has become woke, they don't understand that national sovereignty is what's important.
15:23 I mean, nobody asked him to do that, really. And by doing that, he's developing a new political position. We can't help it. But I think, in fact, I see it, and that's why it bothers me, that Dominique Pagani, someone who's been around, I think, in his life, and who has already experienced... has already experienced Soral, in fact. Soral was someone who was close to Clouscard, Pagani, Aymeric Monville, a whole circle like that, and who became a fascist.
15:58 How did that happen? And what must they have thought of it? I think it must have been very hard for them, because he must have been a friend at first, because he must have been someone they perhaps trusted and everything, who mixed their names in with his own, and then in the end, Clouscard, near the end of his life, had to write a piece in L'Humanité saying that Le Pen was the polar opposite of his thinking, and that if Soral wanted to join Le Pen, he could do as he pleased, but that it had nothing to do with what he himself wrote. And so, I think that this whole circle—Pagani, Monville, Clouscard—already went through this with Soralism, and reliving it a second time with Loïc Chaigneau, it hurts, but really, you have to open your eyes, that's what's happening.
A right-wing man never presents himself as being on the right 16:37 So, I'd love to be wrong, I'd love for Loïc Chaigneau to come out really as a communist, but no. He's in a lamentable state, fragmented, blinkered, atomized, to the point that sometimes I get the impression there's no more debate except between the right—that is, the one that takes place on the left. How does Macron put it? We are the progressives, facing us are the populists, the reactionaries, the fascists. It's extraordinary.
17:08 You see, we come back to it, and it is indeed a left-right question after all, to answer that. Come on, let's be serious now. It's very rare for a man of the right to present himself as being of the right. That's good, that! That's good! The right is never as effective, is it, in its most condemnable aims, as when it presents itself under a left-wing label. Well yes, but that's like... That's like Tondelier and company arriving. Yes, exactly, I'm pro-Palestinian, pro-Palestinian, but still, Israel has the right to defend itself.
17:43 It's much easier to present it that way. If you show up and say, I'm pro-genocide, I think the Palestinians should disappear—if you say that, it won't fly. But if you say, no, I'm for peace between everyone, a two-state solution, I'm even rather pro-Palestinian, and all that, what they're living through isn't good. But well, there have been deaths too, so Israel has the right to defend itself. That immediately sounds a lot more acceptable. It's the same thing, nobody says directly—well, nobody, there are people who do it, but saying directly, I'm a far-right racist, that's still quite rare, quite rare to be that clear about it.
Islamo-leftism, Islam, and Islamism 18:18 No, no, people say, no, I'm being realistic, unfortunately today there's too much immigration, even though I'm for living together—that's how people present themselves. But maybe that's also how Loïc presents himself. I'm a communist, me, sure, but today, the Bedouins, you know... Yes, I'm alluding to the Mitterrand generation, of course, how did the man from Vichy manage to become the very incarnation of the left? Right? When people on the right talk—oh, I want to get back to current events here, but in passing, because if we start talking about the Middle East problem, we'll go off our program—about 'Islamo-leftism,' that's how they put it, but that's people on the right, how does...
19:03 Pagani? But yes, no, but Pagani is right, but I'm sorry, Islamo-leftism—I don't even know if it's possible Loïc has ever used that term—but I mean, it's in the unconscious of the guy who writes an article about the Bedouins and then writes an article about the leftists afterward and explains NUPES and, in fact, the people who are in an objective alliance with the Bedouins—well, the Institut Homme Total's article about the Bedouins is an article about Islamo-leftism. Pagani, you don't see the Islamo-leftism?
19:33 Ah, I see an Islamo—I see a use of Islam, that's clear. No, sorry, not of Islam, never. Muslims are the main victims of what I'm denouncing, by far. I'm—that is, we're following this tragic and very recent news, those two Swedes who got shot in Brussels, weren't they, that teacher, on the anniversary of another teacher? But these are isolated incidents.
20:04 But it's by the hundreds of thousands that people are being murdered in appalling conditions in Muslim countries. But that's where—I really like Pagani, you know that anyway—but the guys who spend their time right now going on and on about terrorism, whatever. Yes, of course, everyone condemns the fact that there are civilian assassinations, whether it's in France in attacks, or what happened with Hamas. But the primary violence, the one that provokes this violence, is still the violence of American imperialists, but not only them, French imperialists too, other imperialists who come and wreck countries and kill hundreds of thousands of people, and it feels like one life isn't worth as much as another life.
20:49 We get the impression that when they kill 100,000, it's just a number. But imagine, 100,000 dead people. Here we're talking about 10,000 dead in Palestine, including 3,000 children. It's staggering. By extremists who claim to act in the name of Islam and who are Islamists, not simply Muslims. Now, this Islamism is recent. There have always been sects. There have always been... Wait, can I say, if I don't want to...
21:19 After that, I'd watched—I think he talks about the rise of Islamism, notably how the United States got involved in it, all that. In any case, interesting. I apologize to Dominique Pagani if he took it badly. This isn't against him that I'm doing this, but against Loïc Chaigneau, because I think Loïc Chaigneau is doing all kinds of nonsense and has become an enemy of communists today. I can't help it, really. I really can't help it. And unfortunately, that's how it is.
