"Why is the Green campaign dangerous?"

Laurent Herblay has been running the free Gaullist blog since 2007.

Let us imagine that the RN had a campaign calling on young people to register on the electoral rolls, stressing that certain groups, or Daniel Cohn-Bendit, for their part, planned to vote . The media storm would have been considerable, and environmentalists would not have been the last to summon the darkest hours in our history by denouncing this stigma. If the campaign of the Greens in Île-de-France has aroused criticism, the withdrawal of a visual is insufficient: the entire campaign must be withdrawn.

Respect for the planet is a noble cause, especially since the environmental movement seized it very early on, from the first alerts, and we can think that it is a very useful stimulus to the awareness of the gigantic flaw in our economic model, far too indifferent to the fate of the planet that carries us.

This explains the episodic electoral breakthroughs of the Greens in recent years.

But since their accession to power in several large cities, the controversies have continued to multiply, and end up drawing a disturbing portrait of this political family, which the episode of Julien Bayou's communication campaign reinforces once again.

For a year, the Greens have revealed an increasingly worrying face, with very extreme hints.

Guillaume Tabard is right to speak of “fault” by stressing that this campaign is “

”, and is based on “

".

In doing so, it is difficult not to see that this communication is based on the same mechanisms as those of the extreme right with regard to foreigners or certain groups.

And again, it is more about the mechanisms of the extreme right of Le Pen father, than his daughter, who suddenly seems more moderate in her communication than the young Green shoots.

Because finally, the stigmatization without nuance of the boomers is perhaps not what is worse in this campaign, even if this generalization is completely ridiculous, as pointed out well Anne-Sophie Chazaud in the FigaroVox.

Ad hominem

attacks

against Éric Zemmour and Alain Finkielkraut seem to me to be much more revolting, for several reasons. Even if we can not agree with them, denouncing them in this way, making them a form of incarnation of evil, amounts to making them targets, which they do not need, so much the two men suffer. already attacks against their persons. There is a form of very unhealthy determination to strengthen their status as a scapegoat in the eyes of a certain fringe of activists, of which the Greens are close. Even if it is not explicit, this campaign is a form of incitement to hatred of two intellectuals, from which the Greens and Julien Bayou seek to take advantage. And because these are individuals and not groups, this incitement to hatred becomes particularly dangerous. Finally,their religion also raises the question of the porosity of this left to anti-Semitism.

More generally, for a year, the Greens have revealed an increasingly worrying face, with very extreme hints, as Anne-Sophie Chazaud notes. The desire recently expressed by the mayor of Poitiers to change children's dreams, through its deeply Orwellian character, has totalitarian overtones. In addition, we must not forget that Airbus is a flagship of France, which will no doubt matter little to the Greens, and that the company is already developing hydrogen planes. The desire to wipe out traditions that are nevertheless strongly rooted in the population (Christmas tree, Tour de France) seems to indicate a desire to re-educate the crowds which is not without echo with the practices of totalitarian regimes, especially since 'it is done in a particularly sectarian and intolerant way.

Putting a target behind an intellectual's back is unacceptable.

To top it off, the Greens' reaction to the controversies is very political.

They say they see in these attacks the hand of the majority, in order to discredit any criticism.

But in doing so, they show above all their refusal to question themselves, and an ability to divert the debate when they are in difficulty.

And Julien Bayou's reaction to the controversy over his campaign is deeply dishonest.

To say that he would not have validated the visual "

" is undoubtedly a big lie, a "

As he seems to have admitted.

The process of creating a communication includes several stages, which he could not ignore, and it is very likely that he at least validated the creative idea and the different angles, including that of the boomers.

In addition, he had hastened to diffuse it on his account ...

In the end, it is not only the visual on the boomers that poses a problem, especially since it is especially harmful for the Greens.

It is this whole campaign, and especially the posters targeting Zemmour and Finkielkraut, that should be removed.

Putting a target behind an intellectual's back is unacceptable.