THE FALSE DEBATE REGARDING THE PRESIDENT OPINION: SOCIALIST, SOCIAL DEMOCRAT OR SOCIAL LIBERAL
HOW A GOVERNMENT WITHOUT COMPETENCE CAN FALL IN A RIGHTIST MIRE BY LACK
OF POLITICAL COURAGE AND CREATIVE THINKING
By DIDIER BERTIN - September 3, 2014
I-AN INVOLONTARY BUT REAL AND PRECARIOUS PUTSCH
After a quiet political career François Hollande was chosen as candidate to the presidential elections most probably because of the troubles in New York' Sofitel of the main candidate and of the unfair position taken towards Martine Aubry. Socialist militants believed naively that the head of the Socialist Party could be a perfect representative of the Party's ideas able to support their values and their electoral program despite his personality was not perfectly in line with the job. The troubles of the former President of the IMF and the reject of Martine Aubry perhaps because she is a woman brought François Hollande on the front of the stage. This candidate thus benefited from the energy of the militants and of the party's electoral program. François Hollande should have been grateful to the militants and Party for the unexpected gift he received when he became President. Democracy requires from any elected person to apply the program for which he was mandated and not use the power issued from such mandate for personal convenience or by adapting it to his ability when a situation surprises him or is beyond his competence. Taking the opposite direction of the one who brought him to power could be considered as a Putsch since it is a major disrespect of the basic principles of democracy linked to popular representation. When a service sold is not at all consistent with its related commercial contract, his provider may be subject to legal penalties. This common-sense principle in trade should a fortiori be imposed on those who have been elected or appointed to provide the highest services to the Nation: President, ministers and members of Parliament from the majority who were all elected on the same requirements. We do not suggest the resignation of the President or the dissolution of Parliament which both will offer a resounding victory to the Right and far Right wing and involve the disappearance for a long time or forever of the Left wing. It would be better to choose a prime minister capable to apply the electoral program supported by the majority of French citizens even if this would reduce in fact the power of the president.
II-THIS SITUATION IS NOT INCURABLE AS WE ARE STILL A PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY
This situation can be stopped by the Parliament. This implies that the majority of Socialist MP's, who were also elected to implement the electoral program of the Socialist Party, play their role as representatives of the people who elected them and force the current government to resign. We do not criticize the personal quality of the Prime Minister and his ministers but the catastrophic path in which they are guiding the French people by conviction, incompetence or discipline. This path is opposite to the one chosen by a majority of French at the elections of 2012 as well as in the following ones. Parliament must force a new government to reconsider all things from scratch, as this was done by the Socialist Party before the 2012 elections and because there are only three years remaining to prevent the disappearing of the Left wing and the triumph of the far right. If MP's do not fulfill their duty as mandated representatives of the people they would take a huge responsibility and would jeopardize the democracy.
III - THE PROBLEMS BEYOND THE ABILITY OF GOVERNMENT
1- THE SIZE OF THE PUBLIC DEBT
The substantial French debt was known before the election even if it turned out to be larger than expected and "dynamic" measures were considered to encourage the economic growth. Current static economic steps and supplications before large corporations aggravate the debt because public funding is offered to these corporations instead of being given to citizens or to reduce the public debt.
2- THE FACT THAT LARGE FRENCH CORPORATIONS HAVE LOST THEIR NATIONALITY BY THE MASSIVE INTERNATIONAL PARTICIPATION IN THEIR EQUITIES
This was known before the election and instead of finding a dynamic and adapted solution to create jobs by encouraging the growth of economy we have preferred " supplications and vain offerings to the new gods: the big companies , up to carry on the sacrificial altar a century of hard struggle to improve social and human situation of citizens. These offerings of rights and money of French are vain because capitalism is as a god of stone, "a robotic system only driven by profit." and make useless the supplications of slaves.
The State should have developed and created large companies and French Establishments with large employment rate (we had proposed a recovery plan without the means of investigation of the Ministry of Finance in France since major economic parts of the country are not exploited) on which it could articulate an incentive policy in favor of economic growth and employment. BPI (Public Investment Bank) appears to have been a fiasco from this point of view. Instead we expect ridiculously that unemployment will decrease only by raising the number of controls from job centers as Sarkozy had proposed it in the past.
The followership in Ukraine to support a government including many neo-Nazi ministers fighting the Russian-speaking minorities endangers French medium-sized businesses and jobs because of Russian retaliation. The European Union should have explained to Ukraine that its Charter of Fundamental Rights is favorable to minorities and unfavorable to neo-Nazis instead of making an association with this country. Even Ashton posed in a photo with the head of the neo-Nazi party Oleh Tyahnybok. Europe changes difficultly and might be incurable.
Internationally we should focus our efforts in the fight against Islamic terrorism which generates huge human tragedies by applying the Koran to the letter and Europe should consider for Islam a Vatican II at least on its territory. Instead we simply follow the russophobie of the United States, Germany and Eastern European countries that joined the European Union. The European Union has ridiculously named Donald Tusk as President of the European Council when Poland denies its citizens the benefit of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which should have resulted in the exclusion of this country. Even the Hungarian dictatorship is a member of the European Union. Latvia and Lithuania do not give their nationality to persons born on their soil if they are of Russian origin which is a discriminatory act incompatible with the spirit of Europe. Those who had the least suffer from anti-Russian retaliation are the American instigators. Russophobie that is no longer linked to communism is ingratitude in respect of a country which with the former Soviet republics has freed the world from Nazism losing 27 million of its people; the Anglo-Saxons "in fact" arrived for the final victory parade. We hope that some of our efforts have helped the invitation for the first time of a Russian president to commemorate the landing of June 6, 1944 because without him, these commemorations would have had absolutely no sense.
3-DISCOVERING THE WEIGHT OF THE EURO AND BRUSSELS
This was known before the election and it was question to reconsider the functioning of the European Union from scratch but this idea seems to have been abandoned.
a) The weight of the Euro
The strong euro is a continuation of the strong Mark and is perfectly adapted to the economic structure of Germany which stands out as great leader of the European Union. Strong Mark or Euro is favorable to its imports and does not affect the growth of its exports. The fight against budget deficits and for austerity measures that create unemployment are a battle led by Germany in favor of a strong Euro. If Germany wants to kneel all the European peoples then we must rebuild Europe. We could keep our free trade zone, Schengen area, and under other conditions the Euro but national and social identity of each member state must be respected.
b) The weight of Brussels
European majority is rightist or far rightist and as the weight of Brussels increases we seem to be condemned to put ourselves in unison i.e. to abandon national democracy. National democracy loses weight and the electoral choices of French lessen. This may be in the same worry to be in unison that our President initially Socialist became then Social Democrat and then Social Liberal within only two years. Are we doomed to become chameleons with no opinion?
National democracies must keep their weight in Europe that makes its richness while the European unique stereotyped thinking impoverishes us and increases unemployment. We must renegotiate EU treaties.
The staggering increase in the number of members of the European Union to make a great market for large corporations and to continue the Cold War in setting foot in Eastern countries has severely damaged the European idea and made of it a simple economic system emptied of its essential substance.
The Eastern European countries that we have welcome are generally antisocial, very conservative and anti-Russian as the Cold War against communism still exists. The Prague Declaration of 2008 followed by the European Parliament is eloquent about it. Europe seems to be a bridgehead of USA as the United Kingdom which also refuses to provide its citizens with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The high degree of under development of the vast majority of Eastern European countries is expensive for the European Union currently in crisis. We should consider a creating a two-speed Europe for these countries in order to protect the original European idea. These countries believe that we can negotiate History in Brussels as an ordinary commercial contract. The Eastern European countries must make the effort to upgrade in terms of tolerance, education and economy before they can truly become members of the European Union.
The Socialist electoral program promised the opening of huge projects on economic, social and European reforms, instead we let ourselves engulfed by the European Conservative Maelstrom. We are the second European power and we need to be heard because there will be no Europe without France and all the more UK seems to be seriously on departure. A smaller Europe will be stronger if it is socially cohesive than an amalgamation of members who do not share the same views and the same hopes for their citizens.