English translation of the French transcript, made with AI and not yet proofread — click a paragraph to jump to it. Show the French original
Loving Europe, fighting the European Union 0:00 What I'm about to say isn't entirely orthodox, but at the same time, historians know it, they just don't say it. Roughly speaking, I love Europe. I'm not thinking of the European Union when I say that. I'll say this right away: Tchaikovsky, Kandinsky, to switch art forms, or Dostoevsky are not, as far as I know, Asians, Africans or Americans.
0:37 They're supposed to be Europeans, but already, people ask— I questioned a young person not long ago, so subjected to propaganda, poor kid, who said that Russia wasn't in Europe. For him, Europe is the European Union. So there, already, to answer your question, so we don't get the wrong target: I fight against the European Union because I love Europe. First thing. Because otherwise, generally, when you start criticizing the European Union, people say you're "hexagonal," withdrawn into your hexagon, etc. All the same. There you go.
The 1945 peace: the balance of terror, not Brussels 1:07 I even find that the European Union is an insult to Europe, to its values and its history. First of all, what I'll tell you—I'll go quickly, I'll try to stay political, otherwise it would take me too far—there were European elections recently, and you saw clearly that this time it was a bit on the defensive, all the same, a little bit. They could feel the mustard starting to rise, and not only in France. For a long time, we were made to believe that the French were the champions of anti-Europeanism, then we realize the English, the Danes, and so on. So there remained one argument, you know it as well as I do, the most consensual argument of the pro-Europeans: Europe means peace.
1:44 All the same. You're young, so you need to take this seriously, because peace and war are the most serious things there are, after all. All the same. And it's true that Europe was at peace throughout the whole period, let's say, from 1945—for the first time in its history—until... I won't say until when, you'll see why, I'm keeping a little surprise for you. Until a recent period, let's say. And Brussels' Europe has absolutely nothing to do with it.
2:16 If we had peace throughout that whole period, it's because there was what was called the balance of terror—it's all over the newspapers of the time—because two extra-European powers, the Soviet Union and the United States of America, were staring each other down, saying whoever moves first. Well, obviously, that's what granted peace, an exceptional period of stability, which is not without consequences for the economy, prosperity, etc. Stability goes hand in hand with... You see the poor countries currently being ravaged by fire and blood, the time it will take them to recover from their devastation.
2:51 So there you have it, first lie: Europe is not peace. I'd even go further: Europe is war. I'll surprise you, you'll see. The proof is that as soon as the Berlin Wall—well, one of the two elements—I'm not making propaganda for the Soviets here, I'd have been the first shot under Stalin, talking the way I talk, you can imagine. But all the same, as soon as the Soviet Union fell, war returned to Europe. Those are the Yugoslav wars. That's why I said from '45 until today there was peace—that too is a lie. There's still the war in Ukraine right now. That's not very far from the Balkans.
Slovenia, Germany and the Yugoslav wars 3:23 War started up again as soon as one of the two protagonists of the balance of terror disappeared. That's really not a coincidence. Let me point out, by the way, that the war didn't actually start because of Bosnia in Yugoslavia, nor because of Bosnia or Croatia, but because of Slovenia, which is never talked about. The most Germanized country of former Yugoslavia, the northernmost, quite normal for historical and geographical reasons—it's the former Austro-Hungarian Empire, which had adopted the mark as a practical currency for circulation well before the rest of Yugoslavia—and a country that was recognized by the Bundesrepublik, by the Federal Republic of Germany, for the first time since 1945, a great European country, Germany, recognizing a border change in a sovereign state.
Bypassing the states: the origins of Brussels' institutions 4:11 It's as if tomorrow Corsica became independent, and Germany immediately recognized it. That would look strange for the Franco-German relationship. That's what happened, that's what one might say, and that's what set off the Yugoslav wars. Now, I'm not bashing the Germans—I believe I'm one of the most Germanophile men, culturally speaking, in France. But let me point out, by the way—and now I'll take your question, because I'll wrap up on Europe and finish there, provisionally—that the European institutions headquartered in Brussels were built to get around a major obstacle they encountered in 1945.
4:45 That is, in 1945, on the right, the strongest force was the Gaullists, and on the left, the strongest force was the Communists. I'm just recalling things that are in every newspaper. That is, two forces that gave the Americans hives, first of all—it's really no coincidence—and to get around the state, they had to go through civil society, to put it in political terms. Get around it through foundations, you see, the way you can already sense today's Europe coming, through NGOs—I lived in the Third World, you know, the abject fauna of predatory NGOs, in the service of NATO, which is one of the hells of humanitarianism. I respect the decent folks on the ground who give injections, they're not who I'm targeting, I'm talking about those who run them.
Revanchism, rearmament and the demonization of the Russian 5:30 So there you have it, that Europe was built to allow Germany to get its revenge. It's harsh, what I'm saying, it sounds simplistic. There's a very common term in the politics of the 50s, 60s, and still a bit in the 70s, which has disappeared. It's the term "revanchist." When there was the project for a European Defence Community in the 1950s, where they already wanted to rearm Germany—that was a pretext—it rearmed Germany, why not give it nuclear weapons too? That made it twice that, through Germany, Europe had been bled—I say "through," I don't know, made to bear Germany's blame, there are other great imperialist powers that could share the honor.
6:08 But we had barely emerged from the bloodiest conflict in human history and already people were thinking of rearming Germany, had it not been for the defeat of that project by the Gaullists on the right and the Communists on the left. And now, we're being told again about different... You saw what the Russians are doing in Ukraine? We must arm ourselves more. Yes, it's starting again. The demonization of the East, of the bad Russian, who is always the villain anyway, whether Tsarist, Communist, or Putinist—in any case, he's the poorest. So we conclude he's the villain.
6:39 Bastard of a poor man.
