#François Macron | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

nesiacha · 28 days

Text

When politics gets involved in history (French Revolution part)

As a general rule, when politicians meddle in history, it often creates confusion. Today I will talk about how they handle the French Revolution.

Of course, Jean Jaures did a good job on this period, although there are naturally points to criticize. But generally speaking, our politicians allow themselves to make crude or inappropriate remarks.

There are even serious historians who fall into the trap by making political amalgamations. A few days ago, while doing research, I came across an excerpt from an article by Thierry Lentz, a respected historian, made comments in Le Figaro comparing the left-wing opposition party, France Insoumise, to the Hébertists, labeling them as vulgar. My intention on this page is not to promote France Insoumise, but to qualify the Hébertists as vulgar (I imagine he also includes the Cordeliers and the Exagérés) is not good for me (the only thing that can be qualified as vulgar is the newspaper Le Père Duchesne and Hébert's style). Moreover, what does he mean by the left's reinterpretation of the Terror? He talks about Marxist-Leninist dogma in his terms, but Lenin preferred Danton, who was not a Hébertist. Plus the Bolshevik revolution was not based on the same principles as the French Revolution. The French Revolution has democratic aspects that the Bolsheviks did not apply (I'm not saying this to denigrate gratuitously the USSR, which became Russia, let's be clear). A country that has undergone a revolution compared to another country doesn’t necessarily adopt the same principles (often because there are different contexts, different paths, etc.). And reducing the Hébertists, Cordeliers, or Exagérés to the Terror is quite reductive (I have already expressed my thoughts on the Cordeliers in one of my posts).

Moreover, in left-wing parties, from what I have observed, it is rather the character of Babeuf that is taken up, considered as the father of communism (I once met a communist who saw Momoro as a reference and another who prefer Marat), while France Insoumise is something else (we can rather place Robespierre in the radical left, but I don't think he would have been a socialist, and we can be sure he was not a communist). So why once again Thierry Lentz associates France Insoumise with Trotskyism and Marxist-Leninism for taking up Robespierre? I mean, okay, there were communists who admired Robespierre like Stellio Lorenzi, but clearly not as many as one would think.

While Lentz's expertise in French history is widely respected, such political analogies raise questions about the neutrality of historical interpretation.

Moreover, it is interesting that the fact that "La Caméra explore le temps" rehabilitated the Montagnards led to the end of the program because of the Gaullist government. Once again, politics gets involved in history and leads to very bad results.

Now it's President Macron's turn. With Stéphane Bern, the president started to explain that an edict signed in 1539 by François I imposed French as the sole language in France. However, historian Mathilde Larrère says it was the French Revolution that imposed French as the sole language on the French. Once again, politics in history can lead to bad results.

I won't even talk about certain elements of the far right who claim to be followers of Robespierre because that would be giving them publicity, and it's not my vocation.

Now let's move on to Mélenchon from the France Insoumise party, who also made significant historical errors during this period. First, in one of Robespierre's videos, he calls Marie Antoinette a "spoiled brat." Accusing the former queen of treason I understand, she gave all the information she could to the enemy, but when you hear "spoiled brat," you're passing a value judgment that has nothing to do with it. Finally, he invents a marriage of Pauline Léon, saying that she ended her life in bourgeois fashion with a Girondin.

Moreover, Melenchon explain that the extreme left of the time was manipulated by the corrupt who arrested Robespierre. Okay, there were Billaud-Varennes and Collot d'Herbois in the mix, but you can't tell me that the Plaine was part of the extreme left. Moreover, most of the elements of what was called the extreme left were either in prison, like Claire Lacombe, Pauline Léon, Jean-François Varlet, or eliminated, like Chaumette, Momoro, Ronsin, and Hébert at the time of 9 Thermidor.

Moreover, contrary to what Mélenchon suggested, Chaumette and Hébert were not part of the Enragés movement.

In the end, this is the problem when our politicians try to shape history to fit their agendas. It leads to significant inconsistencies and inaccuracies.

#Politics #historical interpretation #Political #frev

20 notes · View notes

theculturedmarxist · 6 months

Text

[...]

A long time ago, while conducting research for my master’s thesis on how the economic reforms of [French President] Emmanuel Macron had closed the circle started by [François] Mitterrand, I came to realize that the old Thatcherite idea, “There is no society, only individuals with the freedom of choice,” had become so commonly accepted in contemporary society that both right– and left-wing neoliberals today feel no need to emphasize it.

Social surveys have also found a shocking lack of empathy and solidarity among communities in the U.S. and Western Europe, exactly at the time the dominant political narratives have begun to insist on inclusiveness and tolerance toward others. Subtle distinctions in definitions can often reveal commonly understood and yet unspoken differences between terms that we prefer to use: Inclusiveness does not necessary oblige solidarity or empathy, just as tolerance in the absolute sense means merely withholding action based on existing animosities, which are acknowledged by the very need for the usage of the term in question. Tolerance, indeed, does not have to mean understanding and accepting increasingly distant “others.”

A question must be asked: Are we now, through ideological terminology, searching for exactly those things that we are in fact missing in our social reality? The need to define ideological terms prompts this question in that it arises only when certain notions have left the sphere of unspoken social consensus—the very frame of political and social thought.

In his latest book, The exiled terms, Todor Kuljić, who is among the most internationally recognized Serbian sociologists of the previous and current century, explains how four decades of neoliberal reforms have influenced significant changes in the language we use to discuss ideology and politics, noting that all the terms previously connected to class inequalities, Marxist ideologies, and collective struggles of the working class have been systematically replaced with less critical, less “communist sounding” terms.

In sociology curricula, the terms “exploitation,” “revolution,” and even “humanism” have been almost completely forsaken, while we can see increased usage of words such as “transition,” “transformation,” and “social exclusion.” The term “transition,” a case in point, normalises poverty and corruption in countries that need to be convinced that they will be much better off when they adopt neoliberal economic models.

The famous comedian George Carlin put forward a notion that there is a cultural tradition in the United States of constantly inventing new terms, and “exiling” the old-fashioned terms, which derives from the constant need to make the brutalities of everyday life more easily accommodated. “Americans have trouble facing the truth,” Carlin once said, “so they invent a kind of soft language to protect themselves from it.” If poor people used to live in slums, to cite one of Carlin’s standup routines, “now ‘the economically disadvantaged’ occupy ‘substandard housing’ in ‘inner cities.’”

Anthropological studies have shown that this tendency has certain connections with the totemistic belief of the earliest human societies that, by changing the way we verbally identify a certain aspect of reality we can change the reality itself. It appears that this has never been more relevant than in the case of the modern culture of political correctness, which proposes that we accept social problems as consequences of our subconscious thoughts and/or individual actions, and try to solve them by changing the language we use to define them—while never searching for their material causes.

Professor Jordan Peterson has claimed that modern-day political culture developed in a manner in which the previously presumed need for objectivity was replaced with subjective feelings and perceptions, while the very understanding of material reality has been, through relativization, reduced to little more than an inconvenience that can be regulated by state legislation and group stigmatization. On the other hand, Slavoj Žižek holds that it is precisely the abandonment of the collective (ideas) for the individual (interests) that has led our increasingly globalized political culture down this path. The neoliberal, postmodern left has merely followed the neoliberal right of the eighties in the project of eliminating undesirable terminology related to physical, class, and social reality—depending on the preference of each—from the common frames of political debate, since a consensus on understanding material reality is the first and necessary condition of the collective political struggle.

Žižek also claims that the phenomenon of New Age leftists striving toward zealous political correctness merely contributes to depriving formal and informal human relationships of what is the very essence of humanity. This is because following the increasingly strict standards of Newspeak, as Orwell would put it, necessarily increases the distance between people by making them focus on their differences, thus continuously reinforcing the same barriers neoliberal leftists wish to break free of, while, at the same time, leaving them unable to overcome the tensions of every-day interactions through humor and other forms of releasing the burdening contents of the individual and collective subconscious.

Further, if we take into account the previously mentioned thesis of Professor Kuljić, we can also propose the question: To what extent is the modern neoliberal leftist obsession with political correctness a consequence of the absence of a language and terminology by which young people could articulate the actual causes of their fear and anger and the need to express political radicalism? Of course, leftists of this persuasion remain thoroughly within the existing frame of the globally dominant ideology and never challenge the economic and political system.

At the same time, neoliberal right-wing policies continue to insist on the previously discussed narrative of personal responsibility—or, rather, personal “guilt”—not for the problems of cultural inequalities, which their leftist counterparts remain unable to relate to their actual causes in material reality, but rather for the position of the individual in the new economic order. Now in social media we witness the rise of an entire generation of young conservatives who present success and failure in life—mostly defined by the acquisition of wealth rather than personal happiness—as a consequence of individual decisions and actions, entirely decontextualized and removed from one’s personal circumstances, class background, and social context.

Unlike the previous authors of the self-help books from the early eighties, these new “life coaches” of the internet are heavily engaged in the relativization of ethics, with some going as far as to conclude that those who stay employed in times of low wages and worsening labor conditions, instead of risking their financial existence with private business gambles, have no one but themselves to blame for being exploited. Thus, in a perverted sense of logical framing, they arrive very close to an argument used by ancient Greek philosophers to justify slavery: “An Athenian would rather kill himself than become a slave.”

Neoliberal leftists legitimize the unfair treatment of others for personal gain with the condition that you address respectfully the same people whom you are exploiting—and, as well, disregard solidarity as the core value of the left. Contrarily, the neoliberal right wing insists that participation in the hierarchy of social and economic power is a goal necessary to achieve and a matter of personal choice, and not at all of social reality. It is as though they, the neoliberal right wing, have forgotten with how much effort traditional conservatives tried to uphold the principles of ethics—even if many of those principles were not part of the initial humanist–Enlightenment agenda, or universal values as Immanuel Kant would define them, but served only to preserve position and ensure reproduction of the upper classes—as though there truly was no society anymore.

Not even the Prussian militarists of the old German Empire ever went so far as to assert openly that there is no common good, not even a universal moral code, and that, rather, you should seek to enrich yourself at the expense of others just to prove your own capabilities to a society you don’t even believe in anymore. But modern-day conservatives have crossed this line by seducing today’s ever more fearful youth with the promises that, if they prove capable enough, they can assume the role of the oppressor themselves and exploit the weak, who deserve their fate for failing to seize the “boundless opportunities” of some neoliberal economic paradise.

Thus, prevalent neoliberal left– and right-wing ideologies have not just disregarded, fragmented, or redefined traditionally universalist principles of ethics; they have also forsaken many “core values”—an emphasis on collective solidarity or personal liberty, common wellbeing, or individual morality—which defined the differences between the significant left– and right-wing ideologies of the previous two centuries. Even more important, humanity has been almost completely exiled from the sphere of ideological priorities—in favor of politically correct formality in the case of the New Age left, or, in the case of the New Age right, in favor of a convenient indifference to social problems. The value of humanity, in the sense in which it was understood during the course of the 20th century, will therefore have a hard time finding its way back into the ideological frames of the new world order.

Luka Filipović, among the youngest Serbians ever to earn his doctorate, holds a Ph.D. awarded by the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Belgrade. He has published numerous articles regarding the history of labor movements, communist parties, neoliberal economic reforms, and political turmoil of the late 20th century in Europe and Serbia. His book, Eurokomunizam i Jugoslavija 1968-1980,(Eurocommunism and Yugoslavia 1968–1980), is published this month by the Institute for Contemporary History in Belgrade, where Filipović currently conducts his research.

#neoliberalism #reactionary ideology #reactionary politics #society

19 notes · View notes

aurevoirmonty · 2 months

Text

La France, la Russie et les traîtres.

Il est parfaitement naturel que des opposants politiques placent leurs espoirs dans une puissance étrangère voisine, surtout quand celle-ci correspond à leurs idéaux. Il ne s’agit pas de "trahison", mais d’une réaction parfaitement saine. Au XVIe siècle, par exemple, les catholiques français ne juraient que par l’Espagne ; au siècle suivant, les protestants français ne juraient que par l’Angleterre, et un noble français réfugié en Allemagne en 1792 souhaitait tout naturellement la victoire des armées autrichiennes. Rappelons aussi qu’en 1870, les républicains se sont levés comme un seul homme à la chambre des députés pour applaudir à l’annonce de la défaite des armées de l’Empereur Napoléon III, parce que l’instauration de la république devenait enfin possible, grâce à Bismarck et à l’armée prussienne. Pour une grande partie des sympathisants de la droite nationale, la Russie réactionnaire de Vladimir Poutine représente aujourd’hui une force qui aimante les énergies et qui vivifie les espérances. Tout est parfaitement logique. Parce que oui : des millions de patriotes français souhaitent de toutes leurs forces que ce régime cosmopolite s’effondre le plus vite possible. C’est ainsi : les Européens cultivés et conscients de certains enjeux eschatologiques comprennent que l’intérêt national ne peut se concevoir sans l’idée que l’on se fait de la nation. En clair : une France qui serait peuplée à 80 % de mulâtres ne serait plus la France. Nous ne souhaitons pas la destruction de l’Occident mais l’anéantissement des forces cosmopolites qui se servent de l’Occident pour détruire toutes les communautés encore libres sur cette terre. On se souvient qu’en 1999, les "méchants" désignés par les démocraties étaient les Serbes, qui refusaient de céder leur terre historique aux musulmans du Kosovo : ils ont été copieusement bombardés. En 2001, c’était au tour de l’Afghanistan ; en 2003, ce fut l’Irak ; en 2007, on se souvient que les intellectuels mondialistes nous poussaient de toutes leurs forces à faire la guerre à l’Iran, mais le morceau était trop gros à avaler. Puis il y a eu la Libye en 2011, la Syrie en 2012, et Daech en 2015. Toutes ces guerres menées par les démocraties n’ont jamais correspondu pas aux intérêts des peuples occidentaux mais uniquement aux intérêts du mondialisme. Quant aux terroristes de Daech, ils avaient suivi une logique de vengeance parfaitement naturelle : « Vous nous bombardez, vous tuez nos enfants ; nous allons par conséquent porter la guerre sur votre sol ». Si les Hollande, les Fabius et compagnie avaient laissé le président syrien Bachar el-Assad gérer la menace islamiste locale, nous aurions sans doute évité les attentats sanglants de 2015-2016. Mais l’ennemi prioritaire des mondialistes à ce moment-là était Bachar el-Assad, et non les islamistes de Daech. Pourquoi ? Le tweet le plus explicite du moment reste celui de François Hollande, président de la république française ; c’est un collector, qui date du 16 novembre 2015 : « Nous éradiquerons le terrorisme pour que la circulation des personnes et le brassage des cultures demeurent possibles. » Voilà. C’est bien cela, leur objectif : le brassage des cultures, l’ouverture des frontières et le métissage généralisé sur toute la planète. Depuis 2005, je n’ai cessé de citer tous ces intellectuels, tout au long de mes livres. Une fois que l’ennemi est défini, tout est extrêmement simple, et il devient impossible de se retrouver dans le même camp que les bellicistes les plus enflammés que sont les BHL, Glucksmann, Cohn-Bendit, Macron, Le Maire et compagnie. Depuis le 24 février 2022, c’est donc maintenant à la Russie de tenir le rôle du grand méchant ; et tout est mis en œuvre une fois de plus pour nous pousser à la guerre.

6 notes · View notes

marie-chatelaine · 7 months

Text

Regardez "Macron a préféré Charles III au pape François - Tanguy Pastureau maltraite l'info" sur YouTube

youtube

😄 😄

......... 😏 😊

#Youtube

13 notes · View notes

observatoiredumensonge · 1 year

Text

La nouvelle lubie de Macron ? Redécouper les grandes régions !

Décentralisation, que de découpages on commet en ton nom. Ce serait donc le nouveau dada de notre Président. Par Frédéric Sirgant (more…) “”

View On WordPress

#boulevard voltaire #Carole Delga #françois hollande #Frédéric Sirgant #Macron #Observatoire du MENSONGE #politique #régions

0 notes

alexlacquemanne · 2 months

Text

Février MMXXIV

Films

Maigret voit rouge (1963) de Gilles Grangier avec Jean Gabin, Michel Constantin, Vittorio Sanipoli, Paul Frankeur, Guy Decomble, Françoise Fabian, Paulette Dubost, Laurence Badie, Roland Armontel et Jacques Dynam

L’Étau (Topaz) (1969) d'Alfred Hitchcock avec Frederick Stafford, Dany Robin, Claude Jade, Michel Subor, Karin Dor, John Vernon, Michel Piccoli, Philippe Noiret et John Forsythe

Flic Story (1975) de Jacques Deray avec Alain Delon, Jean-Louis Trintignant, Renato Salvatori, Claudine Auger, Maurice Biraud, André Pousse, Mario David et Paul Crauchet

Poupoupidou (2011) de Gérald Hustache-Mathieu avec Jean-Paul Rouve, Sophie Quinton, Guillaume Gouix, Olivier Rabourdin, Joséphine de Meaux, Arsinée Khanjian, Clara Ponsot et Éric Ruf

Air Force One (1997) de Wolfgang Petersen avec Harrison Ford, Gary Oldman, Glenn Close, Wendy Crewson, Liesel Matthews, Paul Guilfoyle, William H. Macy et Dean Stockwell

Bob Marley: One Love (2024) de Reinaldo Marcus Green avec Kingsley Ben-Adir, Lashana Lynch, James Norton, Henry Douthwaite, Sevana, Hector Lewis et Tosin Cole

Sister Act (1992) d'Emile Ardolino avec Whoopi Goldberg, Maggie Smith, Kathy Najimy, Wendy Makkena, Mary Wickes, Harvey Keitel, Bill Nunn et Robert Miranda

Astérix : Le Domaine des dieux (2014) d'Alexandre Astier et Louis Clichy avec Roger Carel, Lorànt Deutsch, Guillaume Briat, Alexandre Astier, Alain Chabat, Élie Semoun, Géraldine Nakache, Artus de Penguern, Lionnel Astier et François Morel

Race for Glory: Audi vs. Lancia (2024) de Stefano Mordini avec Riccardo Scamarcio, Daniel Brühl, Volker Bruch, Katie Clarkson-Hill, Esther Garrel, Gianmaria Martini : Hannu Mikkola et Haley Bennett

Buster (1988) de David Green avec Phil Collins, Julie Walters, Larry Lamb, Stephanie Lawrence, Ellie Beaven, Michael Attwell, Ralph Brown et Anthony Quayle

Laura (1944) d'Otto Preminger avec Gene Tierney, Dana Andrews, Clifton Webb, Vincent Price, Judith Anderson, Dorothy Adams et Lane Chandler

Séries

Affaires sensibles

Présidentielle de 1995 : un scandale d'Etat - Michèle Mouton, le Groupe B et les Finlandais volants - Les Ecoutes de la République - La secte du temple solaire, le drame d’une société secrète - Munich 1972 : destin tragique d'un rêve olympique - Les révoltés des Jeux olympiques - Le crash de la Germanwings - Alexandre Litvinenko, victime d’un permis de tuer - Martin Luther King : la naissance d’une icône - Martin Luther King : du rêve au cauchemar - Dans l'ombre de Gérard Lebovici - Macron 2017, le traitre méthodique - Kurt Cobain, portrait d’une génération - Crash au mont Saint Odile

Maguy Saison 1

Rose et Marguerite, c'est le bouquet - Babar et Bécassine se mènent en bateau - Docteur j'abuse - L'union fait le divorce - L'annonce faite à Maguy - Le coupe-Georges - Amoral, morale et demie - Cinquante bougies, ça vous éteint ! - A visage redécouvert'' - Le serment d'hypocrite - Tu me trompes ou je me trompe ? - Comment boire sans déboires - Un veuf brouillé - Le père Noël dans ses petits souliers - L'emprunt ruse - Tous les couples sont permis - L'amant de la famille - Travail, famille, pas triste - Blague de fiançailles - Macho, boulot, dodo - Mi-flic, mi-raisin - Trop polyvalent pour être honnête - La traîtresse de maison - Les trois font la paire - Un grain peut en cacher un autre - La quittance déloyale - Belle-mère, tel fils - Manège à quatre - Comme un neveu sur la soupe - Toutou, mais pas ça ! - A corde et à cri - Jamais deux sans quatre - L'amant comme il respire - Le chômage, ça vous travaille ? - La faillite nous voilà ! - Le divin divan - Toubib or not toubib - L'écolo est fini - Loto, route du bonheur

La croisière s'amuse Saison 2

Un contrat en or - Le Magicien - Copie confuse - Un travail d'équipe - Accrochez-vous au bastingage - Le Célèbre Triangle - Joyeux Anniversaire : première partie - Il y a si longtemps déjà - Passion - Un coup de roulis - Docteur, vous êtes fou - La Petite Illusion - Donne moi ma chance - Qui vivra verra - Réunion de travail : deuxième partie - Méfiez vous de votre meilleure amie - Vague à l'âme - L'amour est aveugle - Chassé croisé

Downton Abbey Saison 6

À l'aube d'un nouveau monde - Le Piège des émotions - En pleine effervescence - Une histoire moderne - Plus de peur que de mal - En toute franchise - Aller de l'avant - Les Sœurs ennemies - Le Plus Beau des cadeaux

Kaamelott Livre IV

Le Jeu de la guerre - Le Rêve d’Ygerne - Les Chaperons - L’Habitué - Le Camp romain - L’Usurpateur - Loth et le Graal - Le Paladin - Perceval fait ritournelle - La Dame et le Lac - Beaucoup de bruit pour rien - L’Ultimatum - Le Oud II - La Répétition - Le Discours - Le Choix de Gauvain - Fluctuat nec mergitur - Le Face-à-face : première partie - Le Face-à-face : deuxième partie - L’Entente cordiale - L’Approbation - Alone in the Dark II - La Blessure d’Yvain - Corpore sano II - L’Enchanteur - Les Bien Nommés - La Prisonnière - Les Paris III - Les Plaques de dissimulation - Le Vice de forme - Le Renoncement première partie - Le Renoncement deuxième partie - L’Inspiration - Les Endettés - Double Dragon - Le Sauvetage - Le Désordre et la Nuit

Coffre à Catch

#153 : Finlay, le retour ! - #154 : Gloire aux Heels ! - #155 : Les débuts historiques de Sheamus ! - #156 : Les Bella Twins arrivent à la ECW ! - #18 ; CM Punk continue d'impressionner & quelqu'un fait du vélo ! - #12 : Le Push de CM Punk + Bsahtek le Bikini !

Castle Saison 4

Sexpionnage - Jeux de pouvoir - Une vie de chien - Le Papillon Blue - Pandore, première partie - Pandore, deuxième partie - Il était une fois un crime - Danse avec la mort - 47 secondes - Au service de sa majesté - Chasseurs de têtes - Mort vivant - Jusqu'à la mort s'il le faut

Les Brigades du Tigre Saison 1

Ce siècle avait sept ans… - Nez de chien - Les Vautours - Visite incognito - La Confrérie des loups - La Main noire

Alfred Hitchcock présente Saison 2, 6

Incident de parcours - Pièce de musée - Reconnaissance

The Grand Tour Saison 5

Trop de sable

La ville Noire

Première partie - Deuxième partie

Les Petits Meurtres d'Agatha Christie Saison 3

Mortel Karma

Spectacles

Monsieur chasse (1978) de Alain Feydeau avec Michel Roux, William Sabatier, Françoise Fleury, Yvonne Gaudeau, Pierre Mirat, Xavier Vanderberghe, Michel Mayou, Bernard Durand et Roland Oberlin

La Bagatelle (1977) de Jean Meyer avec Amarande, Patrick Préjean, Jacques Balutin, Brigitte Chamarande Bel, René Lefevre, Pierre Aufrey et Didier Roussel

Femmes en colère (2023) de Stéphane Hillel avec Lisa Martino, Gilles Kneusé, Hugo Lebreton, Nathalie Boutefeu, Fabrice de la Villehervé, Sophie Artur, Clément Koch, Magali Lange, Aude Thirion et Béatrice Michel

La Pélerine écossaise (1972) de Sacha Guitry avec Jean Piat, Geneviève Casile, Philippe Etesse, Robert Manuel, Raymond Baillet, Françoise Petit, Alain Souchères, Janine Roux et Ly Sary

Livres

Piège de chaleur de Richard Castle

Spirou et Fantasio, tome 15 : Z comme Zorglub de André Franquin, Jidéhem et Greg

Kaamelott, tome 1 : L'Armée du Nécromant d'Alexandre Astier, Benoît Bekaert et Steven Dupré

OSS 117 : Tactique Arctique de Jean Bruce

Astérix, tome 17 : Le Domaine des dieux de René Goscinny et Albert Uderzo

#mediatheque #fevrier24

4 notes · View notes