“After Julien Bayou, whose turn is it?”

Philippe Guibert is a consultant, former director of the SIG.

He published

The Tyranny of Visibility

The resignation of Julien Bayou from his partisan functions is a sign of Kafka's return to French political life (we could already meet him, it is true, in his administrative life).

"

", such is the incipit of the novel

, by the famous Prague writer, master of the modern absurd and guilt.

We thought Kafka was stored in the depths of our nightmarish imagination;

Alas, guilt without cause is about to experience a new topicality, thanks to the media grace of feminist progressivism.

"

", writes Julien Bayou Monday morning in his press release, "

(we will appreciate the subtle inclusion)

”.

Read alsoEugénie Bastié: “The totalitarian temptation of neofeminism”

Bayou could not defend himself, for lack of an indictment!

He was only told, supreme perversity, that the facts were not “

”.

Adding no doubt: "

".

There is a congress soon, at EELV... The absence of adversarial procedure, despite the existence of a dedicated internal commission, which Julien Bayou's lawyer points out that she refused four times to hear it, demonstrates the absence of a basic sense of justice in environmental mores.

It's like being in a dying dictatorship, when the tyrant decides to get rid of a recalcitrant or an intruder without any other form of trial.

Note that this way of doing things constitutes a regrettable regression compared to the famous Stalinist trials, in which there was at least a staging of a procedure after long weeks of preparation, with the elaboration of official lies and forced confessions of the accused.

In reality, it was not an accusation that she had launched against Julien Bayou on the set of C à vous, a week earlier.

We had misunderstood: it was a fatwa.

Philippe Guibert

Under Stalin, we tried to keep up appearances, for the good Soviet people and some naive Westerners.

With Sandrine Rousseau, we do not report to the people, we owe ourselves only to the Good.

Any dispute is evil, that is to say “part of the problem” according to the expression of popular feminism – the problem of patriarchy obviously.

We could smile and remember the summary exclusions pronounced in the eight-closed of extreme small groups, in particular leftists, in the good years of the post 68. But neither EELV, nor LFI are small groups, they are parties with elected officials, local and national, participating in the political life of a liberal democracy, which prided itself on not condemning arbitrarily, after more than two centuries of learning the procedures.

But among our ecofeminists fighting against the predatory dominations of the androcene, (is their harshness a way of denouncing this sexist prejudice which associates the feminine with compassion?) the presumption of guilt weighs when a simple suspicion exists .

Just talk about it.

But not with anyone: with the new avenger of all women who are victims of men, Sandrine Rousseau in person.

In reality, it was not an accusation that she had launched against Julien Bayou on the set of

, a week earlier.

We had misunderstood: it was a fatwa.

Moreover Yannick Jadot, yet an internal opponent of Sandrine Rousseau, went one better, with rare elegance, by asking Bayou to resign a few days later.

Because as soon as the case was publicized, mass was said and Bayou condemned: suspicion replaces any idea of ​​procedure, with its share of harmful rumours.

We already knew that the secrecy of the investigation, the presumption of innocence, the rigor of an independent investigation and a few other principles were corny old things, in 2022. But we discover here that no procedure, even ape, even internal, is not essential.

Moreover, since the facts are not criminally reprehensible, it is therefore that they are morally reprehensible.

And who decides on morality?

Sandrine Rousseau of course.

The law of the suspects of our great revolutionary terror has therefore also found a future, albeit sanitized: the guillotine today is political and media-based, and no longer physical;

we erase you, we “cancel” you.

To be rendered invisible, it will be said, is less definitive than the executioner's ax.

Or even: ask M. de Rugy and his lobsters.

It suffices to be suspected of having committed a moral fault, unknown to its author and in no way attested if one believes the account of his lawyer, since this suspicion is proclaimed by a high feminist priestess.

Philippe Guibert

With the Quatennens affair it has become clear that publicly confessing a fault and repenting of it constitutes an ultimately aggravating circumstance.

A fault, even if apparently short-lived, deserves full political degradation, before a judicial inquiry, in the public square.

It is understood and it is moral, since a reprehensible slap, it is the indubitable proof that you are a violent man.

With the Bayou affair, we take an additional step: it suffices to be suspected of having committed a moral fault, unknown to its author and in no way attested if we are to believe the account of his lawyer, since this suspicion is proclaimed by a feminist high priestess.

Morality everywhere, justice nowhere, on the side of good – but a lot of small manoeuvres.

It's a bit short to refer these deposed political leaders to the principle of the "sprinkler sprinkled".

And it is a bit of an illusion to believe that these public dismissals will remain confined to the "progressive" camp: the strength of the media system, which has dreamed of itself for so long as the definitive judge of good and evil, by espousing the dominant ideology and by making of us, the jurors of the mock trial, will continue on its way.

Ministers have been forced to resign as soon as they are indicted.

Normal indeed.

Then ministers resigned without being indicted, then without criminal incrimination.

The next logical step is to resign without any fault, by decision of a "moral" authority.

It's so good to see a presumptuous fall - guaranteed audience show.

Those who mock should reflect: perhaps the death knell is tolling for them too.