The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Roussel-Rousseau debate: “Counter discussion between the Republican left and that of the 11th arrondissement”

2022-03-25T13:47:09.768Z


FIGAROVOX / MOOD – For Benjamin Sire, the debate on Friday March 25, at a low level, highlighted two lefts: that of Fabien Roussel supposedly popular but secular, facing coercive ecology, embodied by Sandrine Rousseau.


Benjamin Sire is a composer and journalist

The French left is said to be dead, referring to these polls which give all of its representatives barely a quarter of the votes in the upcoming presidential election.

Dead?

Maybe, but God how many of them want to carry his coffin, hesitating between burying it and exhuming it one last time!

Few votes, but so many candidates.

Each clinging to his chapel, from the most insignificant where Poutou, Arthaud and Hidalgo are agitated, to the most gleaming from which Jean-Luc Mélenchon thunders, holder alone of half of the voting intentions on the left.

Between these two types of parishes, the rafts of the PCF and EELV jellyfish sail on sight in the desperate hope of reaching the bank of the 5% guaranteeing the reimbursement of expenses incurred in the campaign.

This Thursday, March 25, these two frail skiffs approached each other in the troubled waters of the France Television program, Elysée2022.

Two boats, badly... embarked, but only one captain, Fabien Roussel, that of the Communists, while the ecologists had delegated Sandrine Rousseau, to bring him the contradiction.

No doubt that by dint of slingshots and stabs in the back, Admiral Jadot ends up getting seasick and prefers to ruminate in his eco-responsible cabin in real dead wood, while his little Judas lets burst her vengeful smile on sets where she no longer has any legitimacy to express herself since she was banished to the Bayou.

Considering consolidating their bridge through this media rapprochement offered by the public service,

our two sailors actually shipwrecked together, each in his own way, each with his fantasized world, each flattering his incompetence.

What remains of our loves (on the left) after this baroque confrontation which we pinch ourselves thinking that it is part of the race for a supreme magistracy whose level only causes affliction?

Almost nothing, if not always this other nagging question: how did we get here?

On March 25, facing Léa Salamé and Laurent Guimier, there were however two visions of society that clashed.

On the one hand Roussel's “happy days”, this claim to the right to happiness which does not go beyond the communication slogan and is contradicted by a program quite symptomatic of communism.

On the other hand, Rousseau's coercive ecology, based more on a revengeful corpus than on realistic solutions capable of stemming the climate and environmental crisis.

Rousseau rightly points out, and particularly in this period of extreme international tension stimulated by the war in Ukraine, the cradle of Chernobyl, the frightening potential of nuclear power.

Benjamin Sir

In this little game of inconsistencies, we did not think to write it, it is undoubtedly Sandrine Rousseau who triumphed in vain, so much Fabien Roussel had only his friendly smile and his language of "djeuns" ("donf! ") to oppose the nonsense repeated by its

competitor

like so many peremptory mantras.

The only passage on the nuclear will have been enough to invalidate the utility even of the confrontation.

Fabien Roussel wants to be pro-nuclear.

Good for him.

But to hear him and especially to consider his inability to counter his opponent, we especially understood … that he understands nothing.

Nuclear power is a technical subject, infinitely complex and it is acceptable that a politician does not master all the issues.

But Fabien Roussel does not have much to say about it.

He is for and that seems to be enough for him, regardless of the advantages and dangers of the atom.

Sandrine Rousseau, she points out with accuracy, and particularly in this period of extreme international tension stimulated by the war in Ukraine, the cradle of Chernobyl, the frightening potential of nuclear power.

But it is his only moment of lucidity.

She is afraid that the Russian forces are playing with the Ukrainian power stations, noting their haste to take control of them.

Good.

Has she been informed that Russia is more or less the first nuclear military power in the world and that if she wants to play with this material to scare, which she does, she has no need for sabotage?

Sandrine Rousseau also seems unaware that a large part of the more than 8,000 tons of uranium that feeds our 58 nuclear reactors come from Canada, Australia, but also, as she says,

from Kazakhstan (which is the world's largest producer), taking up the fantasy of dependence on that which is extracted in Niger and Mali.

Whatever.

Fabien Roussel has nothing to answer him.

Nor on the cost of nuclear, which Sandrine Rousseau considers much higher than that of renewables.

In reality, the calculation is complex and takes into account multiple factors that the finalist in the environmental primary refuses to consider.

If, indeed, nuclear energy and renewable energy follow diametrically opposed cost trajectories in favor of the second, its intermittent character, its structure, its piloting and recycling defects, make it considerably more expensive.

Worse, if nuclear power does not come to the aid of wind power when the wind is capricious, it is towards gas and coal that we must turn, fossils in chief among fossils.

Sandrine Rousseau has it easy to criticize Roussel for a speech that

“takes up the arguments of the nuclear lobby”

, the communist candidate could have retorted that his own could be dictated by the coal and gas lobbies.

Instead, he smiles, looks for the valve.

He laughs at Roussel with his “happy days” where people boast about this red wine that he drinks with the zinc of mediocre politics.

So everyone puts off their tour and the left cries.

So, everyone raises their elbow and it's all of France that toasts.

Creating an offense of non-sharing of household chores as proposed by Sandrine Rousseau is indeed a subject.

How to set it up?

With a cop in every household?

Benjamin Sir

And finally, faithful to the discussions at the counter, we kindly argue about the distribution of household chores, taking up Sandrine Rousseau's proposal to create a kind of fine for those who do not do their part.

It is indeed a topic.

How to set it up?

We ignore it.

With a cop in every household?

A camera placed on each household appliance able to identify which of the man or the woman uses it?

And what about households, which are a very small minority, where the man does more than the woman?

What about homosexual couples?

Will they be spared by an exceptional law intended for “cisgenders”?

But by the way, why are we talking about this subject since it comes from Sandrine Rousseau's brain alone, and does not appear on Yannick Jadot's program?

Two visions of France clashed, we are told.

Admittedly, only two letters separate, Rousseau and Roussel... but all the rest too.

To read alsoFabien Roussel, candidate of the Republican left or real "coconut"?

At Roussel, an allegedly popular, republican and secular left (paraphrasing Laurent Bouvet, initiator in 2011 of the popular left, before co-founding the Republican Spring in 2016), which advances with slogans and postures without tangible adequacy with a program.

At Rousseau, the desire to deprive of freedom any citizen having the audacity not to adopt the standards of life of the 11th arrondissement of Paris, is not to benefit from the means.

It seems that this is called “doing politics differently”.

It is undoubtedly for this reason that Sandrine Rousseau, from Lille, was parachuted into the capital for the legislative elections, unbolting the legitimate candidate and supported by local activists, Claire Monod.

Source: lefigaro

All news articles on 2022-03-25

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-27T16:45:54.081Z
News/Politics 2024-03-28T06:04:53.137Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.