Good evening to you all,
policy, these are technical decisions and monitoring manager, but it is mostly of words and images . The electorate is marked by them, not those. That is why the politician should always be careful what he says. It is a pedagogue Who, at the national level to millions of people. The metaphor is at home, to be understood, a figure of speech tempting and almost obligatory. His choice is delicate, perilous. The news gives us two examples: In
Puy-en-Velay, Nicolas Sarkozy praised the "Christian roots" of France, taking care not to be blamed a new attack on secularism , to cite other "roots", Jewish or philosophical (the contribution of the Enlightenment). Who can dispute this evidence history: the national heritage is at the crossroads of multiple influences, old and sometimes contradictory. That's what makes the richness and genius of our country.
Where then is the problem? In the fact that Nicolas Sarkozy is not a history teacher but President of the Republic, it is not a course but sends a message, it is not for a class but a people. The image of "roots", I received, it is clearly dangerous , even if we believed harmless, some "roots" whether Christian or not. Why? Because the "roots" refers to the past, while the Republic normally cares about the future. Especially because
that "'roots divide us, while the Republic emphasizes what unites us. Christians or Muslims, atheists or believers, right or left, we all recognize in the formula republican "liberty, equality, fraternity". That, and that alone, that a president because he is president, should celebrate. Democracy is a frame with principles and laws , not a tree with branches and roots.
Second metaphor of the day, so unhappy that she has turned against itself: the "shield" tax, which François Fillon has announced the end, admitting and a government failure, as the famous "shield" was a measure of the flagship 2007 election of Nicolas Sarkozy. The image was however just, just so it has caused many misgivings and protests.
What's this? To protect large taxpayers, by stopping the progressive income tax when the tax is too high, "confiscatory" say those who pose as victims. The vocabulary is rich with words to disguise reality! This "shield" was aptly named he was condemned to disappear, so the image was glaring truth : defend the rich, evade taxation at its highest level. If the UMP had chosen another term, I do not know if the fate of this reform would have been different. But it would surely have been seen otherwise.
Good evening.
0 comments:
Post a Comment