Bilan

Viewfinder vient de recevoir ce qui suit.
En fait ce texte est intitulé Les résultats de Sarkozy, par un homme de gauche. C'était écrit il y a deux mois, donc certaines nouvelles tentatives de discréditer Sarkozy, (entre les deux tours des élections, par hasard) n'ont pas pu être traitées.
En considération du fait que la campagne anti-sarkozy semble avoir justement atteint son zénith, et parait même devenir partie d'une cause regurgitée du socialisme quasi européenne sinon internationale, il serait opportun de faire valoir davantage ce que Nicolas Sarkozy a en fait accompli, comme Jean Marichez a bien pris la peine de le faire. 

__  

'Jean Marichez, Ingénieur ICAM retraité, habitant de Montmélian depuis 1994, est chercheur à l'Ecole de la Paix de Grenoble et se situe plutôt à gauche.
Ayez la patience de lire entièrement son article, et surtout sa conclusion. A mettre en perspective dans l’alternative qui nous est “proposée”. . .
Faites objectivement abstraction, le temps de cette lecture, de tout le matraquage que vous avez subi jusqu’à aujourd’hui.

Votre avenir vaut bien le temps de lire ces lignes.

Les résultats de Nicolas Sarkozy :

1. Il est étonnant d’observer la violence et l’injustice des opposants de Nicolas Sarkozy. Selon eux, il n’aurait rien fait, il n’aurait pas tenu ses promesses. Alors, regardons le travail qu’il a réalisé car, au contraire, j’ai l’impression qu’il a réalisé un travail considérable. Selon Alain Minc en 2010 : "En trois ans, Sarkozy a fait plus que Giscard en sept et encore plus que Chirac qui n'a rien fait en douze".

Qu'en est-il exactement ? J’ai extrait de quelques journaux la liste de ses principales réalisations mais aussi de ce qu'on lui reproche.
Concernant les reproches, j’ai toujours été frappé par la fragilité des accusations. Les critiques m’ont toujours paru futiles, superficielles, inconsistantes. Et elles reviennent sans cesse comme si tous les journalistes lui en voulaient :
Sa soirée au Fouquet's après la victoire aux élections (NDLR : alors que tous ses prédécesseurs y avaient leur table).
Ses réparties en langage trop populaire.
Le soutien d'un ministre de l'intérieur taxé d'injure raciale.
Ses liens avec des grands patrons.
Son franc-parler, sa taille, etc.

2. Pourquoi cela ?
Peut-être parce qu’il dérange par le nombre et l’importance des réformes qu’il fait (celui qui ne fait rien n’est pas critiqué). Mais surtout, je crois, les intellectuels ne lui pardonnent pas d’occuper le terrain des idées qu’ils occupaient depuis 1968. Contrairement à ses prédécesseurs, il dit les choses en toute simplicité, quitte à remettre en cause quelques idéologies sacralisées. Par exemple, sur les sanctions à la jeunesse délinquante, sur l’immigration incontrôlée, sur l’assistanat excessif, etc.
L’intelligentsia parisienne ne lui a jamais pardonné de parler de manière décomplexée de vérités qui ne font pas partie de l’idéologie politiquement correcte. Ainsi, toutes les occasions ont été bonnes pour dire du mal de lui. Difficile d’être réélu lorsque tous les médias et beaux parleurs vous attaquent sans cesse comme le faisaient les prêtres de l’Inquisition.

Or quelle est la réalité ?
Au préalable, pour l’honnêteté de mon propos, je dois dire que je ne suis pas un inconditionnel de la droite, j’ai parfois voté à gauche : en leur temps, j’ai fait confiance à Mendès-France ou à Michel Rocard. Si j’étais américain ou chinois, je serais certainement à gauche. Par ailleurs mes travaux personnels sont très nettement progressistes si l’on en juge par les deux livres que j’ai écrits. De plus, je n’ai pas toujours été d’accord avec les décisions de notre gouvernement actuel, par exemple sur la réduction des droits de succession, sur la baisse de TVA aux restaurateurs, sur le manque d’avancée
fédéraliste européenne, etc. mais je constate qu’il a accompli un travail impressionnant, non seulement en nombre (931 réformes en cinq ans) mais en qualité. Il s’est attaqué aux réformes difficiles que même Lionel Jospin n’avait pas osé faire malgré une conjoncture meilleure. Et c’est vrai, il a remis la France à l’endroit sur des rails moins idéologiques, plus pragmatiques. C’est en tout cas l’avis de nombreux commentateurs étrangers qui se désolent de nos excès de religiosité socialiste.

On lui a reproché d’augmenter le déficit public.
Mais est-ce de sa faute s'il fallait absolument sauver l'économie française suite à la crise des
subprimes? Puis s'il fallait sauver la Grèce pour ne pas engager une spirale contre l'Euro qui aurait été catastrophique pour tout le monde et surtout pour les plus faibles. La crise lui coûte cher car elle l'a obligé à nous endetter lourdement pour ne pas plomber nos emplois. La cour des comptes (présidée par un socialiste, qui a signé le rapport) a chiffré que 50% de l’augmentation du déficit public sous son quinquennat était due à l’endettement antérieur, par effet « boule de neige », 45% à la gestion de la crise, le reste étant dû à sa politique en tant que telle, sachant que par ailleurs elle reconnaît que 50 milliards d’euros ont été économisés grâce aux mesures d’économies décidées par lui.

On lui a reproché d’aider les banques alors qu'elles sont responsables de la crise.
Oui, mais sans ce plan de sauvetage les petits épargnants auraient tout perdu et le chômage aurait augmenté au détriment de l'ensemble des Français. De plus, elles ont maintenant totalement remboursé les aides reçues, et les intérêts ont rapporté 3 milliards à l’Etat, c’est-à-dire nous. En Angleterre, le sauvetage des banques a coûté 39 milliards aux contribuables, et elles continuent à perdre de l’argent.

On lui a reproché l’augmentation du chômage.
Mais la crise n’est pas de sa faute. Au contraire, il a réussi mieux que les Américains, et que la plupart des autres pays européens, à contenir le chômage. Celui-ci ne serait-il pas plus élevé avec des gouvernants de gauche qui, pour l'éviter, auraient dépensé des milliards contre-productifs dans l'assistanat et le dépannage à court terme ? Lui a privilégié le long terme en soutenant l'investissement. C’est courageux car les résultats n’apparaîtront que plus tard et ne lui profiteront pas sur le plan électoral.

3. On lui a reproché de favoriser les riches.
En fait, peu de gens comprennent que son but n'est pas de faire de cadeaux aux riches mais
d'empêcher les gens fortunés de quitter le pays et d'investir ailleurs, donc d'avoir suffisamment de gens riches en France pour qu'ils y investissent et créent du travail. Il faut absolument comprendre que la lutte contre le chômage passe par l'existence d’un grand nombre d’entrepreneurs aisés et soutenus dans leurs efforts.

On lui reproche d’être le président des riches.
Mais il est au contraire le premier de nos présidents à avoir pris des mesures égalitaires importantes. Ainsi, alors qu’on lui reproche de favoriser le capital et de ne pas le taxer autant que le travail, il a fortement augmenté les taxes sur le capital afin de les mettre à peu près au même niveau (34,6%) alors qu’ils étaient taxés de 10% de moins sous Lionel Jospin. C’est passé inaperçu mais ses opposants ont continué à l’accabler d’une image anti pauvres qui continue, malgré les faits à lui coller à la peau. Même chose pour l’impôt sur la fortune qu’il a maintenu globalement au même niveau mais en sortant seulement les propriétaires de logements dont les valeurs sont conjoncturellement trop élevées du fait de la crise du logement. La baisse de recettes a été entièrement compensée par l’augmentation de fiscalité sur la transmission du capital. Autrement dit, il taxe la transmission de capital plutôt que le capital lui-même.

On lui reproche d’avoir augmenté son salaire de Président de 30%.
La vérité est toute autre. Avant lui, le budget de la Présidence était un mystère, un domaine réservé où les dépenses du président se confondaient avec le budget de l’Élysée. Il a voulu moderniser tout cela et installer la transparence. Il a donc décidé que son salaire serait égal à celui du premier ministre et que les comptes seraient désormais soumis au contrôle de la cour des comptes.
Comment comprendre que les journalistes ne nous aient jamais expliqué cela ? Sont-ils si
incapables ? Non, plus simplement partisans.

On lui a reproché de ne pas tenir ses promesses.
C’est injuste car, non seulement il en a tenu beaucoup, mais il l’a fait dans une situation de crise inouïe que, personne n’avait vraiment prévu avant son élection.
En fait comme on est en crise, tout le monde se plaint et, comme il faut un bouc émissaire, on l'accuse naturellement de nos difficultés. 12 gouvernements (droite comme gauche) ont été renversés ou remerciés en Europe, par élection ou par les parlements, depuis le début de la crise…
Sont-ils tous des incapables ???
Curieusement, au lieu de parler de "ce qu'il fait", les médias passent leur temps à parler de lui, de sa manière, de ses intentions cachées, de son omniprésence, de ses petites phrases, etc. Pourquoi parlent-ils si peu du contenu, autrement dit des vraies questions ?
Alors justement regardons ses résultats. Ils sont impressionnants.

4. Des réformes qui vont marquer le pays en profondeur et qui sont un véritable progrès de
notre démocratie (elles sont courageuses car les cinq premières réduisent son propre pouvoir de président) :
-La possibilité de recours individuel devant le conseil constitutionnel. Modification de la constitution et Réduction des pouvoirs du Président de la République au profit du Parlement et des citoyens.
 -La limitation à deux mandats de cinq ans pour le Président de la République.
-Nouveau droit donné aux députés de fixer un tiers de l'ordre du jour de l'Assemblée, leur permettant de mieux contrôler le gouvernement.
-Réunion annuelle des deux chambres réunies à Versailles pour entendre le Chef de l’État.
-La loi de représentativité syndicale qui les renforcera tout en favorisant le dialogue social.
- L'autonomie de l'Université réclamée depuis 1968 par P. Mendès-France, leader de la gauche. Même imparfaite, elle met à bas le tabou de l'égalitarisme et sera porteuse de fruits sur le long terme.
- Réforme des collectivités territoriales que depuis 20 ans aucun gouvernement n'avait réussi.
- Réduction du nombre d’élus avec la création des conseillers territoriaux en lieu et place des
conseillers généraux et des conseillers régionaux.
- Redéfinition des cartes judiciaires qu'aucun gouvernement précédent n'osait faire.
- Ouverture de la saisine du Conseil supérieur de la magistrature aux personnes qui veulent mettre en cause le fonctionnement de la justice jusqu’à même sanctionner des magistrats.
- Redéfinition de la carte des villes de garnison que personne n'osait faire.
- Redéfinition de la carte hospitalière.
- Mise en chantier de la modernisation du Grand Paris.
- Rapprochement des policiers et gendarmes sous la même autorité, d’où une amélioration de 50% d’élucidation des crimes et délits.
- Création du service civique volontaire (15 000 jeunes engagés pour 45 000 demandes en 2011 et 75000 en objectif 2014).

5. Des résultats innombrables, et parmi les plus importants (pour ne pas lister ses 931
réformes) :
- La réforme des retraites. Il fallait la faire. Nécessairement impopulaire, aucun des prédécesseurs n'avait eu le courage de l'affronter mais tous la disaient indispensable et urgente.
- Mise en place du service minimum lors de grèves de secteurs publics.
- La suppression de la taxe professionnelle (impôt imbécile selon F. Mitterrand).
- Effort considérable et sans précédent en faveur de la recherche et de l'Université ; et aussi le triplement du crédit d'impôt qui soutient la recherche des entreprises et permet un afflux de capitaux privés vers l'enseignement supérieur.
- La suppression de la publicité à la télévision publique : les Français gagnent 20 minutes par jour.
- Revalorisation du salaire des enseignants (équivalent à un 13° mois) en contrepartie de leur réduction en nombre.
- Réduction de la délinquance –17% ; des homicides –40% ; des atteintes aux biens – 28% ; de la délinquance de proximité – 40% ; et aussi de la mortalité routière.
- Hausse de 20% du budget justice avec 1300 postes supplémentaires – Création de 9400 places de prison – Plusieurs mesures pour éviter les récidives (peines planchers, rétention de sûreté, traitements préventifs…) – Recouvrement des avoirs illégalement acquis par des condamnés, etc.
- Meilleure maîtrise de l’immigration (32 000 reconduite aux frontières de clandestins, naturalisation en baisse de 30%, 300 000 contrats d’intégration signés depuis 2007, etc.).

Emploi
- La relance de l'économie par l'investissement et non par l'assistanat comme dans le passé qui ne donnait que des apaisements à court terme mais des affaiblissements économiques graves à long
terme.
- L'aide à l'industrie automobile, industrie capitale et vitale pour l'économie française.
- La réduction de 160 000 fonctionnaires dont la pléthore plombe notre économie. Contrairement aux apparences, cette mesure est la plus efficace pour l’emploi.
- Création du statut d'auto entrepreneur qui s'avère un grand succès.
- Création de 2,5 millions d’entreprises durant le quinquennat avec soutiens renforcés et simplifiés.
- Amélioration de la flexibilité de l'emploi avec la rupture contractuelle.
- Les demandeurs d’emploi ne peuvent plus refuser plus de deux offres d’emploi valables sans risquer de perdre leur indemnité.
- Développement de l’apprentissage au lieu de forcer des jeunes à suivre des études secondaires qui ne leur servent à rien.

6. Agriculture
- Quatre mesures phares en faveur de l’agriculture ont permis aux agriculteurs de dépasser la crise et d’envisager plus sereinement l’avenir et à 7000 jeunes par an de s’installer.
- Maintien de la PAC au niveau européen.
- Allègement des charges sociales sur l’heure de travail agricole qui passe de 12,81 € de l’heure à 9,43 payée par la taxe sur les sodas de 0,02€ par canette.
- Amélioration des retraites agricoles (création d’un minimum, revalorisation, extension au conjoint).

Logement
- Encouragement de la construction (loi Scellier, pass foncier, prêts à taux zéro doublés).
- Construction au total sur le quinquennat de 2 millions de logements dont 600 000 logements sociaux contre la moitié seulement entre 1997 et 2001 (sous Jospin).
- Modération des loyers par la modification de l’indexation.
- Instauration du droit au logement opposable (34 974 ménages ont pu être relogés après recours).

Assistance
- Augmentation de 30% du budget de logement des Sans abri qui est passé à 1,13 milliard.
- Annoncés en mars 2010, onze établissements de réinsertion scolaire fonctionnent désormais (cent cinquante élèves de 13 à 16 ans ont rejoint ces structures, 9 autres sont prévus en 2011).
- Forte augmentation des bourses et des logements pour étudiants.
- Création du RSA (1,9 millions de foyers aidés – mais surtout, il n’est plus aussi intéressant qu’avant de ne pas travailler).
- Revalorisation de 25% sur 5 ans l’allocation adulte handicapé et le minimum vieillesse.
- Création d’une prime pour les salariés des entreprises dont les dividendes augmentent.
- Assouplissement des accords d’intéressement des salariés aux fruits de leurs entreprises.

Économie (chiffres selon l’Insee).
- Augmentation de 4% du pouvoir d’achat des Français durant le quinquennat.
- Et diminution de 1 million du nombre de personnes qui gagnent moins de 15 000 € par an.

7. J’ai repéré d’un les mesures ci-dessus à fort impact social ou favorables aux chômeurs. On voit qu’elles sont nombreuses et contredisent radicalement l’idée d’un gouvernement pour les riches.

En politique étrangère :
- Efficacité dans le choix de la méthode (traité de Lisbonne) pour résoudre la crise européenne due aux référendums négatifs en France et aux Pays-Bas.
- Leadership de la France dans la résolution des multiples crises européennes. Même si le poids financier de l’Allemagne restait majeur, c’est toujours lui qui fut initiateur, moteur et entraîneur.
- Efficacité dans la gestion du conflit en Géorgie où il assura l’indépendance géorgienne.
- Courage et efficacité déterminante dans la gestion militaire de la crise en Côte d’Ivoire.
- Courage et efficacité déterminante dans la gestion militaire de la crise en Lybie.
- Retour de la France dans l'Otan.
- Création du G20 où son volontarisme fut décisif. Cette instance empêchera peu ou prou les facilités du chacun pour-soi en matière économique et réduira les risques de chaos mondial en augmentant la
possibilité de prises de décisions internationales.
- Meilleures relations avec les États-Unis, l'Angleterre, la Russie, la Chine, l'Inde, le Brésil…
- Signature de nombreux grands contrats dans de nombreux pays.
- Engagement acharné en faveur de l’Euro.
- Gestion imaginative et énergique de la crise.
- Ses qualités d'intelligence, de courage et d'esprit de décision sont largement reconnues par des
chefs d'État étrangers

En politique intérieure :
- Il a gouverné sans drame et assuré la paix, la justice et le respect des libertés et opinions.
- On peut dire que globalement il a gouverné au centre.
- Il a intégralement maintenu notre système de protection sociale.

8.
- Il a fait preuve d’un grand esprit d’ouverture (comme jamais auparavant) en nommant des
opposants à des postes majeurs comme la présidence du FMI en 2007, la présidence de la
commission des finances, la cour constitutionnelle et la présidence de la cour des comptes.
- Il n'a calé sur aucune réforme qu'il croyait juste malgré des grèves et manifestations importantes pour les Régimes spéciaux et l'Université. Il a reculé sur la réforme des lycées avec Xavier Darcos mais il l’a réalisée avec Luc Chatel. A l'occasion des retraites, il a rétabli le fonctionnement de la démocratie grâce à sa fermeté devant des millions de manifestants qui, enfin, replace la légitimité
des décisions à sa vraie place : le parlement. Il en a eu le courage alors qu'il était tellement plus facile de céder (comme l'ont toujours fait avant lui Balladur, Chirac, Jospin …).
- Il n'a pas taxé nos transactions bancaires comme Angela Merkel en Allemagne.
- Il a garanti les crédits des banques, énorme décision qui a stoppé net la panique des épargnants au point qu'ils étaient prêts à vider leurs comptes, ce qui aurait été un pur désastre.

Autres résultats :
- Réunion des Assedic et de l'Anpe, pour l’efficacité.
- Fusion réussie entre les services des impôts et la comptabilité à Bercy (qui avait même fait tomber un ministre socialiste).
- Remise de la France au travail par diverses mesures d’encouragement.
- Changement des règles de la grande distribution et mise en place d'une autorité renforcée de la concurrence.
- Refus d'augmenter nos impôts.
- Délais de paiements raccourcis aux entreprises.
- Aide aux PME par les contribuables qui veulent alléger leur ISF.
- Aide aux associations d'utilité publique par les contribuables qui veulent alléger leurs impôts.

Chantiers en cours où sa volonté permet d'espérer :
- Lutte (en pointe des autres États) contre la spéculation, l'excès de puissance des hedge funds et les paradis fiscaux qui seraient une vraie réponse à la crise mais qui ne peuvent se réussir sans accords internationaux très difficiles à obtenir.

9.
- Courageuse mise en place cependant de la fameuse taxe Tobin pour freiner la folie des transactions financières.
- TVA anti délocalisation de notre industrie.
- Militance pour la mise en place d’une règle d’or assurant constitutionnellement l’équilibre de nos comptes
- Ce n’est pas un chantier en France, mais Mario Monti (nouveau président du conseil italien) en Italie est en train de sauver son pays endetté en appliquant point par point les recommandations de la commission Attali pour la libération de la croissance (Commission mise en place par N.Sarkozy). M. Monti faisait partie de cette commission.

En conclusion
Un dirigeant politique se juge sur ses réalisations. Alors, même si on n'est pas d'accord sur certaines d'entre elles, ce qui est inévitable, on doit reconnaître l'importance du travail réalisé.

La première question à se poser quand on vote pour un homme politique est de savoir s'il joue pour lui ou pour son pays.

La liste impressionnante ci-dessus (et le courage qu’elle a nécessité pour sa réalisation) oblige à reconnaître qu'il travaille pour la France et pour ses concitoyens. Sinon, il en aurait fait beaucoup moins et sa popularité serait plus élevée.

Ses réalisations permettent de dire qu'il est le meilleur des hommes d'État que nous ayons eu en France depuis longtemps.

Doué d’une grande intelligence, il comprend très vite. Il a un grand pouvoir d’entraînement. C’est un leader. Dans les situations difficiles, c’est lui qui comprend le plus vite ce qu’il faut faire, et qui, de l’avis des autres chefs d’État européens, sait trouver le chemin des décisions difficiles. Le sociologue Marcel Gauchet lui reconnaît une grande habileté tactique, une vraie volonté politique, un sens poussé de l'opinion et de ses propres insuffisances. Ne dit-il pas lui-même : 'Mon meilleur ennemi, c'est moi-même.

Même s'il n'est pas toujours parfait, tout le monde reconnaît largement son énergie, son efficacité, sa connaissance des dossiers et surtout, car c'est la vertu la plus rare en politique, son courage.
De plus, n’ayant aucune possibilité d’être réélu pour un 3ème mandat, il est acquis d’avance que son courage ne faiblira pas au cours du second, au contraire.
Voilà, j’ai tenu à faire cette clarification car, quelles que soient nos tendances politiques, il serait dommage de perdre le bénéfice du meilleur chef d’État que la France ait eu depuis longtemps.'

Jean Marichez - 19/2/2012

'En guise de digestif, et toujours à propos de courage, je vous livre le nom de celui qui a dissuadé Lionel Jospin de faire la réforme des retraites en 1998-2002, alors que la France avait une croissance de 4%, c’est F. Hollande.'

__

Intro and composite by Mirino. Text by Jean Marichez (with thanks). April, 2012

Dreamusic

              

             Dishy, spoon-griddle                       

                        The dog did a piddle                               

     The cow tried to squash the cat.       

                           She then sat upon the violin                              
Which was the final opus of that.

As the full moon rose

Above the ghostly scene

The swirling mists returned,

  Then all sounds were reduced to silence,

  And nothing more could be discerned..

__

I used to have an ear for music. Singularly so, for only one worked, and not too brilliantly either. Now it's worse than ever, meaning that I can no longer tune the guitar I used to enjoy playing.

Although I can't hear music correctly any more, as there are certain tones/notes that the remnants of my hearing can no longer properly perceive to transmit to the part of my brain that still appears to be in function mode... of all the forms of music that I loved to listen to, naturally there are certain pieces that still continue to haunt me. They seem to play on perfectly well when I sometimes recall them in the plush, private auditorium of my memory.

Recently I heard one of them in a dream. It was however a new interpretation of what I have perhaps always mistakenly believed to be a Mozart violin concerto. It was such a sublime, magical interpretation that at first I didn't recognise it. Then, as though having cautiously and extremely attentively crept through a subtle prelude subdued by soft, dense mist, eventually into a beautiful sunlit clearing, I finally recognised it. The music unveiled itself to me gloriously. I was so moved that it literally brought tears to my eyes. And in this blissful dream of fabulous sound I tightly closed my eyes and leant back in perfect readiness to be utterly absorbed and transported by such a marvellous, unique privilege; only to be brutally woken up at that very instant by the cat who suddenly jumped on my chest...

Since then, almost obsessively, I've been trying to discover what piece it was and who composed it. A bit like a blind man trying to find a particular flower in an enormous garden by vaguely recalling from memory its particular perfume.
I even called up a dear friend who used to play violin for the Hallé Orchestra, and discordantly tried to hum some of the melody to him. It must have been a nightmare for such a tuned, professional ear. Unsurprisingly he didn't recognise it, and humoured me by suggesting that it might be something by Tchaikovsky.

It has also occurred to me that perhaps Gatsby was right after all. Had he not rudely awoken me from such a magical dream, it may be that I would never have remembered it at all. Perhaps I would never have recalled such real emotion. Or it's possible that I would have been disappointed, due to my memory not being sufficiently stocked to continue, and complete the particular piece of music as perfectly and as fabulously as it had begun.

Whatever, they is something already magical enough about a dream that resuscitates a sense that no longer functions properly, to such an extent as to cause such profound emotion. Especially when the cause of the emotion is not the revived capacity to hear- granted by the dream, but what one is 'actually hearing' within the dream.

__

The top parody is, of course, of  'Hey diddle diddle (...)' the famous nursery rhyme first published in 1765. For more information on it please click here

Text and parody © Mirino. Image (modified) © Curto. April, 2012

'Freedom' of the press

The evolution of afghan history since the end of the Afghan-soviet war is easily accessible to everyone. Viewfinder has also alluded to it enough times.

In addition to the series of errors made by the US government and the Pentagon, the US press might also reflect more about what's at stake before they decide to publish information and images that can only add to the black list and cause negative consequences.

The Los Angeles Times has chosen to publish photographs that again do no honour to the US forces in Afghanistan. The photographs date, however, from 2010.

According to an article on the subject in Le Figaro, most of the soldiers photographed (with dead Taliban jihadists) saw their comrades killed or wounded by the enemy. Maybe one could compare such images with those of avenged trophy hunters posing before the 'man-killer' lion successfully eliminated.

We all know that war brings out the best and the worst of everyone. We know that today, what would have remained relatively secret more than fifty years ago, is often revealed to many millions via Internet, or published by the international press. The latter defends 'freedom of expression'. It justifies that the publication of such images will oblige the authorities to assume their responsibilities more effectively.*

In fact the photographs were sent to the Los Angeles Times by an ex-soldier of the 82nd US Air Division. The soldier, who wishes to remain anonymous, believes that the behaviour of the troops reveals a serious flaw of discipline in high command. He hopes that the publication of the photographs (18) will prevent the repetition of such unworthy acts.

But would it not have been more responsible of the ex-soldier to have first confided the photographs and information to the Pentagon, with a letter to the effect that if the Pentagon do nothing about it, or don't confirm that they have taken the necessary measures to ascertain that such behaviour is not repeated, then the photographs will be sent to the press?

These shameful cases are isolated in comparison with the many acts of bravery and the generous initiatives to bring about greater trust and co-operation with the Afghans. Yet the whole world is only informed of the comparatively few, negative cases.

Sending such illustrated information directly to the press is potentially a political act. This information is immediately sold and shared internationally. It's used as propaganda. The result obtained by any disciplinary action against those who participated is meaningless compared to the real result obtained: virtually that of the total withdrawal of US and international forces from Afghanistan.

We already have enough visual proof of the horror of the First and Second World Wars. But imagine if digital cameras, mobile phones and Internet existed then. We would have quite different view points and ideas about the wars if this were the case.

The war against religious fanatic totalitarianism is all the more complicated when democracy itself becomes its own enemy. When the publication of photographs taken over two years ago, can cause more subsequent damage than say, a successfully co-ordinated attack of several suicide bombers killing hundreds of innocent civilians in the heart of Kabul right now.

When public opinion reaches the conclusion that Nato's presence in Afghanistan is doing more harm than good, (thanks mostly to such reports, naturally also fully exploited by the enemy) one can no longer expect young soldiers to continue to risk their lives for such a denigrated cause.

But the real question remains. What will the Taliban do, once Nato withdraws? The Taliban certainly won't withdraw. They will consider themselves victorious, similarly to the north Vietnamese after the withdrawal of the US troops from Vietnam, but even worse because the Taliban jihad is international. Will they not then be able to retake Kabul, and then perhaps even overrun Pakistan, consequently to have the whole world at their mercy?

*Even Goya, with his etchings of the horrors of the Napoleonic, Penisular war in Spain and Portugal, and in spite of publication limitations of his time, perhaps similarly, but no doubt more rightly so, contributed to the discredit and downfall of Napoleon.

__ 

Text and composite © Mirino. April, 2012

John Milton

John Milton (1608-1674). A genius of English epic literature, perhaps even more so than Spencer. Milton's life, both public and private however, was full of trials and tribulations.

He was the eldest son of a scrivener (a self-appointed notary. In his case, a money lender, a drafter of contracts and an estate agent).
Already at an early age it was evident that Milton had an extraordinary gift for languages. At St. Paul's school he mastered Latin and Greek before learning most modern European languages, and then he learnt Hebrew.
Continuing his studies (aged 16) at Christ's College, Cambridge, he graduated with an A.B. in 1629 and an A.M. in 1632.

He was always an avid reader. It's said that he read every book of importance written in English, Latin, Greek and Italian. It was also a matter of fact that he knew the Bible by heart.

In 1638 his generous father allowed him the means to travel in Europe (especially Italy) to finish his superb education.
Naturally his travels, the widening of horizons, his flair for languages allowing him an enormous scope of communication, and his experiences, would have had a regenerating influence on his views. This certainly regarding religion, politics and education, on which he wrote pamphlets and short essays (1644).
At that time he also published Areopagitica in defence of 'free press'. For his forthright opinions, Milton gradually acquired the reputation of being a radical.

In 1642 he married the young 17 year old daughter of a royalist squire. She left him after a few weeks, which prompted Milton to publish a series of pamphlets defending the idea that divorce should be granted on the grounds of incompatibility. This however, was very much out of keeping with the epoch's rules of decorum, and the idea was labelled 'Divorce at pleasure'. It was considered 'the end of all social order'. Today such an argument would be deemed as basic common sense, whereas in the 17th century it was treated as scandalous. These reactions would have aroused Milton's resentment, isolating him even more.

After the execution of Charles I (1649) of which Milton fully approved, he wrote another series of pamphlets in Latin against the European continentals who criticised the new Cromwell regime. During the writing of this, he lost his eyesight. The fatal consequences of continual eye-strain over the years.
Despite this he was able to carry out duties as 'Latin secretary' to Cromwell's Council. As such he contributed considerably towards diplomatic dignity and credibility of the new government.

In 1645 his young wife returned. After having given birth to three daughters, she died in 1652. Milton married again four years later (Katherine Woodcock, who died through child birth in 1658).

In 1660, the Cromwell movement met its end. Milton did all he could, courageously continuing to publish tracts in defence of the 'Good old Cause', but it was hopeless.
Charles II was recalled to the throne.
During the Restoration, Milton was incarcerated. He would probably have been executed had not powerful friends intervened. He got off by paying a fine and losing most of his property.

In spite of his poverty, blindness and solitude, he married a third time (Elizabeth Minshull) in 1663, and completed an epic poem 'justifying the ways of God to men', the idea of which had come to him many years earlier. Although Milton was hardly popular and still branded as a radical, the poem published in 1667 as Paradise Lost, was immediately recognised as a masterpiece. A judgement all the more commendably objective in view of the poem's unprecedented meter of blank verse (rarely used other than by playwrights).

Paradise Lost was followed by Paradise Regained (1671), the second epic poem of four books (Christ's temptation in the wilderness). Then Milton wrote Samson Agonistes, a tragedy not written to be enacted on the stage.

Milton died in 1674 from fatal consequences arisen from gout.

The work of Milton is a splendid, cumulating monument of two great movements, intellectual and social. The richness of the Renaissance and the Christian humanism of the Reformation. Paradise Lost is an epic comparable to those of Homer and Virgil, but it goes further in revealing the nucleus of humanity and its spiritual and physical relationship with the universe. Love, hate; heaven and hell. It reflects Milton's worldly experience, his great intellect and spirituality.

Milton's hero is Adam, but more as the passive sufferer than the Grecian hero. Adam kills no one and is no match for Satan either. His heroism is simply in being able to acknowledge his own weakness and guilt, and his being repentant of it (as with The Prodigal Son).
Perhaps Milton, endowed with his vast knowledge of languages and their roots, even identified with Adam, just as passively, for he comprehended the relativity of good and evil, as the following extract from Areopagitica* contends.
*What is to be said before the Areopagus : An ancient, puissant and greatly respected Athenian tribunal.

'(...)
Good and evil we know in the field of this world grow up together almost inseparably; and the knowledge of good is so involved and interwoven with the knowledge of evil, and in so many cunning resemblances hardly to be discerned, that those confused seeds which were imposed on Psyche as an incessant labor to cull out and sort asunder° were not intermixed. It was from out the rind of one apple tasted, that the knowledge of good and evil, as two twins cleaving together, leaped forth into the world. And perhaps this is that doom which Adam fell into of knowing good and evil, that is to say of knowing good by evil.
As therefore the state of man now is, what wisdom can there be to choose, what continence to forbear, without the knowledge of evil? He that can apprehend and consider vice with all her baits and seeming pleasures, and yet abstain, and yet distinguish, and yet prefer that which is truly better, he is the true warefaring¹ Christian. I cannot praise a fugitive and cloistered virtue, unexercised and unbreathed, that never sallies out and sees her adversary, but slinks out of the race where that immortal garland² is to be run for, not without dust and heat. Assuredly we bring not innocence into the world, we bring impurity much rather, that which purifies us is trial, and trial is by what is contrary. That virtue therefore which is but a youngling in the contemplation of evil, and knows not the utmost that vice promises to her followers, and rejects it, is but a blank virtue, not a pure; her whiteness is but excremental³ whiteness, which was the reason why our sage and serious poet Spenser (whom I dare beknown to think a better teacher than Scotus or Aquinas°), describing true temperance under the person of Guyon, brings him in with his palmer through the cave of Mammon and the bower of earthly bliss, that he might see and know, and yet abstain.
Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates and hearing all manner of reason? And this is the benefit which may be had of books promiscuously read.
But of the harm that may result hence, three kinds are usually reckoned. First is feared the infection that may spread; but then all human learning and controversy in religious points must remove out of the world, yea, the Bible itself; for that ofttimes relates blasphemy not nicely,¹ it describes the carnal sense of wicked men not unelegantly, it brings in holiest men passionately murmuring against providence through all the arguments of Epicurus;² in other great disputes it answers dubiously and darkly to the common reader; and ask a Talmudist what ails the modesty of his marginal Keri, that Moses and all the prophets cannot persuade him to pronounce the textual Chetiv.³ For these causes we all know the Bible itself put by the papist into the first rank of prohibited books. The ancientest Fathers must be next removed, as Clement of Alexandra, and that Eusebian book of evangelic preparation, transmitting our ears through a hoard of heathenish obscenities to receive the Gospel. Who finds not that Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Jerome,° and others discover¹ more heresies than they well confute, and that oft for heresy which is the truer opinion?²

(...)
Many there be that complain of divine providence for suffering Adam to transgress; foolish tongues! when God gave him reason, he gave him freedom to choose, for reason is but choosing; he had been else a mere artificial Adam, such an Adam as he is in the motions.³ We ourselves esteem not of that obedience, or love, or gift, which is of force: God therefore left him free, set before him a provoking object almost in his eyes; herein consisted his merit, herein the right of his reward, the praise of his abstinence.

(...)

Suppose we could expel sin by this means; look how much we thus expel of sin, so much we expel of virtue; for the matter of them both is the same; remove that, and ye remove them both alike. This justifies the high providence of God, who, though he commands us temperance, justice, continence, yet pours out before us, even to a profuseness, all desirable things, and gives us minds that can wander beyond all limit and satiety. Why should we then affect a rigor contrary to the manner of God and nature, by abridging or scanting those means, which books freely permitted are, both to the trial of virtue and the exercise of truth?° (...)'                                                                                                            1644

°To vent her anger, Venus ordered Psyche to sort out a huge pile of mixed seeds. The ants pitied her and did all the work for her.
¹ Wayfaring or warfaring? Pilgrimage or crusade? The ideas are associated.
² The garland (crown) of virtue.
³ White covering corruption.
° Scholastic theologians.
¹ Daintily.
² Book of Ecclesiastes.
³ 'Keri' : marginal comments of rabbi scholars on the 'Chetiv' of the Bible. The former was sometimes read instead of the 'Chetiv.
° Preparatio Evangelica.  early Christian books went to great lengths and into great detail describing heathen wickedness. St. Irenaeus and St. Jerome were amongst those so accused.
¹ Report.
² One can always find written words to support one's opinion. 'A fool can find material for folly in the best books, and a wise person material for wisdom in the worst'.
³ Marionette shows.
° Censorship.

On Shakespeare°

What needs my Shakespeare for his honored bones
The labor of an age in pilèd stones,
Or that his hallowed relics should be hid
Under star-ypointing pyramid?
Dear son of memory,¹ great heir of fame,
What need'st thou such weak witness to thy name?
Thou in our wonder and astonishment
Hast built thyself a livelong monument.
For whilst to th' shame of slow-endeavoring art
Thy easy numbers flow, and that each heart
Hath from the leaves of thy unvalued² book
Those Delphic lines with deep impression took,
Then thou, our fancy of itself bereaving,
Dost make us marble with too much conceiving;³
And so sepùlchered in such pomp dost lie,
That kings for such a tomb would wish to die.

1630-1632

°The poem is in reply to the complaint of that time, that Shakespeare should have been buried in a more prestigious place than Stratford.
¹ A brother of the Muses.
² Priceless.
³ The millions of enchanted, engrossed (like marble statues) readers, are Shakespeare's eternal monument.

Although all art must speak for itself, it often helps to have a reasonable idea of the lives of artists and writers, to gain a greater perception regarding their masterpieces. Even the briefest biographical account can sometimes be a precious key allowing one to 'read a little more between the lines'.

__

Text © Mirino. Source- The Norton Anthology English Literature, Volume 1. John Milton, extracts of Milton's Areopagitica, his poem On Shakespeare. Portrait of Milton (unknown artist?) collection of Christ's College. With thanks. April, 2012

Scottish myths 14

Tir-Nan-Og

Curiously, many Highland fairy legends repeat the theme of secret places where time stands still. Places where, if one is favoured by the Fairy folk, enchanted by sweet music, carried away in an elated trance for what seems only an hour, one finally awakes to the truth of what we call 'reality'. The incredible realisation that the magic has lasted for as long as a year, or sometimes even several years.

A Gaelic belief is of Tir-Nan-Og where the secret of eternal youth is to be found. The Celtic Ever, or Never Land.
The ancient Celts called it The Land of Light, or The Land of Ever-Living. It was sometimes thought to be deep below the sea, then they would call it The Land Beneath the Waves. At other times it was called the Isle of Joy, vaguely located in the midst of the ocean's immensity and shrouded in glittering haze. Or it was alleged to be found far beneath the pristine waters of a majestic loch where brown trout would flash as they turn to rise.

Or it was believed to be a Shian, one of the many mossy or heather covered knolls that, as Celtic legend relates, hides a Fairy dwelling.

Fairy dwellings of Tir-Nan-Og. Yet it is also said that a few, favoured humans manage to reach this magic Land. Only those blest with the mystic vision, those able to see the messenger. Only those who can hear or feel the magic call.

The haunting Celtic music that wavers on timelessly, like a spirit that softly touches those chosen, wherever they might be. Surely it would be similar to the spirit that curls up with the swirling mists to embrace the craggy hill tops above the glens, or descends to engulf and slowly caress the lochs' dark surface.

It can bring back lost loved ones for an age of an instant, and make one shudder with that precious feeling of goodness, confidence and wholeness, for then indeed time no longer exists, in Tir-Nan-Og.
The blissful state of oblivion, there, in The Land of the Ever-Young, where Fairy mounds and Islands grace the Hebrides. The Land of Magic Music, Haunting Beauty and Eternal Youth. 

__

Scottish myths 15
Scottish myths 13

Text and image (from Arisaig) © Mirino. Source- The Road to Rannock and the Summer Isles T. Ratcliff Barnette (1868-1946) from- A Book of Scotland (Collins). April, 2012

Quentin Owl

 Resting through the day time,
Waking up late,
Quentin Owl is fully dressed
By half-past eight.

Glancing at his pocket-watch,
Waiting in his pine,
Hoping that a friend will hoot
Inviting him to dine.

*

Se reposant toute la journée
Se réveillant avant nuit noir,
Quentin la chouette est tout habillée
Par huit heures et demie le soir.

Regardant sa montre à gousset,
Attendant selon son bon gré,
Espérant au moins que l'on ululera
Pour l'inviter à venir manger. 

            __              


The last lines originally read:
Inviting him to tea.
Pour l'inviter à prendre le thé.

__

Doggerel and image © Mirino (PW). April, 2012

The Dutch nightingale

A good friend suggested that I write in English some observations regarding the French presidential electoral campaigns. So far, for obvious reasons, I've referred to French affairs in French, but as modern communication makes the world smaller, and as European nations depend more and more on each other, especially those of the euro zone, what is at stake in France might also be regarded as of European, as well as international concern.

Oscar Wilde, in his The Soul of Man Under Socialism, made the following observation : '(...) In the old days men had the rack. Now they have the Press. That is an improvement certainly. But still it is very bad, and wrong, and demoralising. Somebody- was it Burke?- called Journalism the fourth estate. That was true at the time, no doubt. But at the present moment it really is the only estate. It has eaten up the other three. The Lords Temporal say nothing, the Lords Spiritual have nothing to say, and the House of Commons has nothing to say and says it. We are dominated by Journalism. In America the President reigns for four years, and Journalism governs for ever and ever. (...)'

That was already the situation in February, 1890. Today, with the additional support of cable and satellite television, and international support of easily accessible Internet, the media wields more power than ever.

As the media seem persuaded that most people are similar to sheep, and are easily led to believe what one might wish to write and publish, they have every confidence in their divine power to influence public opinion. We are also blest with periodical popularity and opinion polls, especially during electoral campaigns, the results of which vary suspiciously according to the agency responsible, and seemingly the outcome required.

One notes that since Nicholas Sarkozy was elected in 2007, certain media have constantly worked against him, discrediting him and denigrating his considerable efforts and accomplishments during one of the most serious economic crisis in history. One could say that this antisarkozy campaign has been orchestrated systematically in order to promote and program the election of a socialist candidate and government next month.

As far as I know, Sarkozy is the first French president to refuse to bend to trade-union pressure. Naturally trade-union power also depends on a pliable government, even at a time when power hungry trade-unions seem increasingly out of clink with the realities of European and world competivity. 

Recently a Belgian journalist chose to visit France and follow Monsieur Hollande during one of his campaign tours. Naturally she was able to meet Parisian journalists eager in being part of his august retinue. She was sickened by what she heard and saw. It was quite obvious that the press cortège was intent on currying Holland's favour for its own personal gain. The Parisian journalists appeared to have good reason to believe that their efforts to promote Hollande would be generously rewarded. 

Even I have been censored and accused of 'defamation' for reproving the 'media' concerned (therefore not even alluding to any particular person or journal) for partisanism.

One is therefore bound to reach the conclusion that the denigration of Sarkozy and the promotion of Hollande have been energetically programmed by the media.
In reality Hollande is a poor substitute for DSK, who, had he not shamefully derailed himself, would have been the first choice as socialist contender for the presidential elections, as everyone knows.

What is less known however, is the fact that when François Hollande was the First Secretary of the Socialist Party, he was informed of the Banon case soon after the event. Despite his Party responsibility, and the fact that he then knew how much the PS depended on Strauss Kahn as its Presidential candidate, Hollande chose to do nothing about it. Being aware of DSK's inclinations, had he reminded the ex-patron of the IMF of his responsibilities, and warned him of the dire consequences should he continue to go off track, perhaps history would have been different.

One might therefore conclude that François Hollande is also a calculator and an opportunist. His bilan is inglorious. Martine Aubry, the other preliminary socialist contender, publicly labelled him as mou (weak and flabby) Even Mme. Royal, his ex-companion and mother of their four children, is said to have stated that François has done nothing in 30 years. But this isn't exactly true. He is still President of le Conseil Général of Corréze which is classed as the most highly taxed region of France, also due to his continuing to finance Chirac's museum, which was/is running at a catastrophic loss. Perhaps he reasoned that Chirac's support would be useful, for apparently Chirac has stated that he will vote for Hollande. This despite Mme. Chirac's open support for Nicolas Sarkozy.
But we all know that Chirac, like de Villepin, has never been a Sarkozy fan. (Clearstream, etc.)

Hollande has never had any ministerial experience. Nevertheless convinced he is going to be elected President of France, he states that he is first and foremost a socialist, which would seem to confirm that as President he would represent first and foremost the socialist contingent of France, and not the French nation as a whole.

His ideas are totally unrealistic, isolationist and irresponsible. His plan to 'improve' the French education system, for example, consists of recruiting the schools with 60,000 teachers. Like most socialists, he reasons in numbers. (For some 'Hollandish' reason he seems to favour divisors of 6). Socialist priorities. As if the broth will be improved by so many additional cooks. For it stands to reason that one good teacher in front of a class of 30, would be far more effective, and far less costly, than three mediocre teachers, each responsible for a class of ten.

He intends to revert to the 'old' retirement age of 60 years, which is another demagogical and totally irresponsible idea. So eager in his dash to be crowned President of the Republic, he invents new ideas, (like taxing millionaires at the rate of 75%, which is unconstitutional) then he gauges the public reaction to them before either abandoning the projects or modifying them, which is a fair indication of his lack of personal conviction and integrity.

Hollande has virtually been fabricated by the media and programmed to win the next elections. He is transparent enough to permit one to see through him, therefore one is aware of his lack of content and consistency. He has even gone as far as to practice and imitate Mitterand's public speech gestures, as the Socialist Party seems to be curiously convinced that the French want to return to the blissful, carefree and illusive era of mythic Mitterandism.
Sarkozy has never been appreciated by the media, probably because he is not influenced by them and is therefore unmanipulatable.
Hollande, eager to please and be appreciated, has already revealed his weakness in this respect, which might explain the reasons for which certain media have chosen to invest their promotional efforts in him.

Ironically the same media have openly criticised him in the past, at a time when it was thought (more reasonably) that he would never be able to contend as a candidate for the presidential elections. For example although Hollande likes to pose as representing the poor (which by extension means that Sarkozy can only represent the rich) he has a number of valuable properties, two of which are alleged to have been absurdly undervalued to avoid paying the legally required amount of property taxes. But it is much easier (and socially permissible) to be a very rich socialist, than a reasonably well-off non-socialist. For the socialists have always claimed the 'monopoly of the heart', even though whenever they have governed there has never been any notable improvement in 'social justice'. After all, let us not forget the priorities of the French socialist party, and the French Trade Unions. Charity begins, and perhaps also ends, at 'home'.

If Hollande is elected, he would have had the support of the only Communist party still functioning, and incredibly still popular, in Europe. Le Front de Gauche, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who appears to believe that France needs a second Revolution. This naturally means that if Hollande is elected President, he would subsequently have to incorporate Communist ideas. (Mélenchon also bellows like another Georges Marchais).

The other main candidates are Eva Jolie with the red glasses, who was unfortunate enough to have had a recent fall. She, like most greens, uses environmental problems as rife left wing, political pretexts. Then there's François Bayrou (the dated middle man of Modem) who seems to thrive on every presidential electoral opportunity to express himself on TV, and criticise Presidents' performances. But he is always careful to avoid any real commitment, such as ever accepting a ministerial post. Marine Le Pen, is brandishing her father's faded Front National flag. After emphasising the real danger of extremism in France, she now criticises Sarkozy for immediately and successfully doing something about it, following the atrocious Mehra affair.
Unsurprisingly most of the candidates are not really in the running. Incredibly however, Jean-Luc Mélenchon is.

In a Europe where direct competivity is the most determining factor, especially in the euro zone, taking France backwards to such isolationist, dated ideas would clearly be catastrophic. But so far, the fabrication and programming of Hollande by the media appear to have paid off. Even the relatively intelligent seem to be persuaded to vote for Hollande, whilst for some unaccountable reason, (apart from five years of left-wing media antisarkozy hammering) and in spite of all that the President has accomplished, Sarkozy is labelled as being detested.

One might reason that the French like changes, to such an extent that they are more inclined to risk the unknown or the dodgy, than stay with a strong, reliable bet. But in this particular case, when Europe is still suffering from the throes of one of the worst financial crisis in history, there's far too much to lose. Hollande is simply not strong enough and not qualified. He is, as one says here, a Tartuffe. An impostor.

In today's Europe, one can no longer simply rob the rich in order to pay the poor. It doesn't work any more, and perhaps it never has, at least not since Robin Hood. The over-taxed rich simply go elsewhere, and then a nation loses out completely. The only serious and responsible way to be able to finance social welfare and public functions is through reasonable public taxation, and by encouraging then allowing enterprises and businesses to innovate and flourish.

The French are capable of producing excellent automobiles, for example, but since 2007, the beginning of the crisis, there seems to have been less innovation, at least regarding petrol driven and hybrid vehicles, than elsewhere. French automobile companies have invested their efforts, perhaps a little too soon, in electronic powered vehicles, whereas Italy has successfully revamped the Fiat 500, and fairly successfully their Alfa Romeo series. Germany (BMW) has had great success revamping the Mini Cooper in time for the Mini's 2009 anniversary. Recently they have had even greater success with their new Volkswagen series.

Therefore direct competition, especially in the euro zone, seems to be in its determining stage. Perhaps the strongest and most successful will eventually be 'European', through mergers etc., similar to the mergers of international publishers. In the meantime concurrence is the criterion. The word competivity, doesn't seem to figure in the socialist vocabulary. It's a word that creates uneasiness in the socialist (and communist) ranks. The socialists still like to believe in the mythic mensonge of 'equality'. They refuse to believe that 'equality' is in fact abnormal or unnatural.
In their bid to bring about equality, (égalité) they will do away with ideas such as rewarding young scholars for good work. In their view it creates 'politically incorrect competivity'. For the sake of mythic equality they will discourage the talented to forge ahead, in order to allow the less talented the chance, in principle, of catching up with them. Naturally the consequence of such absurd ideology is that the level of education is systematically pulled down. It goes without saying that mythic 'equality' can never be fabricated by inverting the process. Socialists would never risk pressurising the less capable to invest the necessary time and effort to equal the more capable.

This dogma is all the more incoherent when the young, newly formed, would-be egalitarians eventually leave school ill-prepared to contend with the real world where competition, for very obvious reasons, reigns.

As the French sometimes have to go through the motions, as though they have a sort of fatal tendency determining that history must repeat itself, France would have to exercise great patience and philosophy should Hollande finally succeed in getting elected. Once again the French would be obliged to learn the hard way, and realise that trying to go back in time isn't the most inspired and opportune idea during a financial crisis, and a period of international instability and insecurity.

The only consolation, should French voters be so inclined, would be the likelihood that Hollande would turn out to be the complete disaster that logic would anticipate, and that his reign would be as brief as possible. Unless there be a more fabulous consolation, and once elected Hollande turns out to be a Fairy Godfather truly capable of performing miracles. But somehow that hardly seems likely, so let's hope and pray that reason will finally prevail, before it's too late.

__

Un après note pour les lecteurs français. En considération du fait qu'un peu plus de la moitié des français ont voté pour F. Hollande, et qu'avant les élections l'enthousiasme de certains de ces partisans était tel qu'ils ne se sont jamais retenus à exprimer leurs opinions en sa faveur (ou plutôt contre N. Sarkozy) et parfois de manière assez agressive, il me semble ironique que depuis l'élection de Hollande personne ne le défende contre les observations et les opinions comme les miennes, par exemple.
Comme un des objectifs originaux de Viewfinder était justement de 'chercher' ou inciter des points de vus divers et constructifs pour contrer de manière intéressante de tels arguments, doit on conclure que le manque de réaction indique un tacite accord général à ces arguments? 

_

Text and image © Mirino. (This image used before has undergone another immediate changement. It could be that despite the French Socialist Party's logo being almost as dated as the French Socialist Party itself, most French socialists would agree that their unsubtle logo would make the magic-wand far more powerful and capable of performing miracles, than the former, less fake, golden coloured, cardboard star).  April, 2012

Mary Wollstonecraft

Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797) was outspoken enough to criticise condescending phrases of writers regarding women, even in the works of Milton and Rousseau. She devoted her own writing talents mostly to human causes, including womens' rights, at an epoch when women mainly served the interests of the male establishment. Her articulate opinions must also have been influenced by the dramatic events of her own life.

After having inherited a fortune, her father tried to establish himself as a 'gentleman farmer'. But his incompetence and extravagance caused his successive farms to fail. Increasingly frustrated he took to drink and tyrannised his wife. Mary later recounted how she would often have to protect her mother by physically shielding her from his brutality. Sometimes she would even sleep outside their bedroom door in order to intervene should her father ever be violent with her mother after another of his drinking sprees.

She was nineteen years old when she left home, and soon had the opportunity to observe the social life of the upper classes whilst living in Bath, having accepted employment to a rich widow there.
In 1780 she left Bath to nurse her dying mother, and then dedicated herself to helping her sister who, after the birth of her daughter, suffered from a nervous breakdown. Convinced that her sister's condition was the result of her husband's cruelty and abuse, Mary persuaded her to abandon him, and even her baby, as it was then very difficult to procure a divorce.

The sisters were obliged to hide until a grant for a legal separation was issued. The child, automatically confided to the father, died before her first year.

Despite their dire financial situation, the two sisters together with a very good friend of Mary's (Fanny Blood) established a school for girls at Newington Green, not far from London. The school was a success to begin with, but Fanny, although she had contracted tuberculosis, left England for Lisbon to marry someone to whom she had been engaged for some time. Fanny became pregnant and Mary Wollstonecraft travelled to Lisbon to be there with her for the birth. Fanny died in her arms soon afterwards, and sadly the baby was also too weak to survive.

Mary Wollstonecraft was terribly upset by this loss. Her depression grew worse when the Newington school had to be closed down due to lack of funds and support. She nevertheless found the courage to write her first book: Thoughts on the Education of Daughters (1786).

Mary was then to be employed as a governess for the daughters of the wealthy Viscount Kingsborough in County Cork, Ireland.
Lady Kingsborough may have been jealous of the obvious affection her children had for their governess. This resulted in Mary's dismissal, and her return to London where she published her first novel Mary, (partly an autobiography) and a children's book : Original Stories from Real Life. The latter was a success. It was also translated into German. William Blake illustrated the second English edition with engravings.

Mary Wollstonecraft was virtually an autodictat. She taught herself French and German, publishing translations in both languages.
Her observations and experiences would certainly have influenced her feelings regarding the French Revolution. This was apparent in her response to Edmund Burke's- Reflections on the Revolution in France, an eloquent attack against the Revolution (1790).
Her Vindication of the Rights of Men, was 'powerful propaganda' that sought to expose the terrible suffering of the English lower classes. It was an immediate success, and paved the way for A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.
The latter is a precise, personal and passionate opinion based on her observations regarding the indignities and injustices suffered by women of the late eighteenth century.

Women then had no political rights, few legal rights, no professional prospects other than menial tasks, and rarely the opportunity, if not the right, to benefit from further education.
Generally women were then oppressed and subservient to men. Their responsibilities were limited to family and domestic concerns. If they were aristocratic, or married to wealthy men of standing, they would have developed refinement and taste, but such 'refinement' devoid of intellect is meaningless.

In 1792 Mary Wollstonecraft went to Paris to witness the Revolution for herself (from 1793-94). There she fell in love with an American adventurer, an affair which resulted in her giving birth to a daughter. Her lover 'Imlay' proved to be unfaithful however, and after she had published her book- A Historical and Moral View of the origin and Progress of the French Revolution, (1795) certain that she had lost him, Mary tried to kill herself. Discovering her intention however, Imlay managed to save her.
He then persuaded her to go to Scandinavia as his business envoi, (probably more to allow him freedom than for any real business motifs). As stoically as ever she travelled there for four months with a French nurse as well as her baby, 'Fanny'.

On her return to London Mary discovered that Imlay had a new mistress. She again tried to do away with herself by leaping from a bridge into the Thames. Just as she lost consciousness she was saved by a passerby.
Imlay left for Paris with his new girlfriend, and as soon as Mary had sufficiently recovered, she composed a book from the letters she had written to Imlay from Scandinavia recording her observations when in Sweden, Norway and Denmark (1796).

That same year, the renewed acquaintance with the social philosopher, William Godwin, ripened into a passionate love affair.
Her writings to Godwin reveal an openness extremely rare for a woman of the 18th century. With Godwin she gave birth to another daughter (Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin). The birth was presumed to be normal, but the placenta was ruptured, and this resulted in Mary Wollstonecraft contracting blood poisoning (septicaemia).
In agony for ten days she finally fell into a coma before dying. 

Her last words were for her husband: 'He is the kindest, best man in the world.'
Godwin wrote the sad news to a friend adding : 'I firmly believe that there does not exist her equal in the world'.

His noble intentions of publishing her Vindication along with her personal letters, (also to Imlay) and accounts of her suicide attempts, were to cause negative consequences by branding her (perhaps conveniently for the 'male establishment') with a scandalous reputation that did nothing to support her passionate defence of womens' and human rights for a considerable period of time. But history always manages to preserve the best of those who are exceptional enough to actively help forge it.

Here is a short passage from A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (second revised edition of 1792)
Basically the Vindication is for women to be granted access and encouragement to benefit from further education in order to rise above the subservient role allocated by the male (and religious) establishments, so that future mothers can excel and become even more exemplary as such, and love, according to Mary, can also precede true friendship regarding married relationships.

'(...)
Nature, or, to speak with strict propriety, God, has made all things right, but man has sought him out many inventions to mar the work. I now allude to that part of Dr. Gregory's treatise, where he advises a wife never to let her husband know the extent of her sensibility or affection. Voluptuous precaution, and as ineffectual as absurd. - Love, from its very nature, must be transitory. To seek for a secret that would render it constant, would be as wild a search as for the philosopher's stone, or the grand panacea°: and the discovery would be equally useless, or rather pernicious to mankind. The most holy band of society is friendship. It has been well said, by a shrewd satirist, "that rare as true love is, true friendship is still rarer".¹
This is an obvious truth, and the cause not lying deep, will not elude a slight glance of inquiry.
Love, the common passion, in which chance and sensation take place of choice and reason, is, in some degree, felt by the mass of mankind; for it is not necessary to speak, at present, of the emotions that rise above or sink below love. This passion, naturally increased by suspense and difficulties, draws the mind out of its accustomed state, and exalts the affections; but the security of marriage, allowing the fever of love to subside, a healthy temperature is thought insipid, only by those who have not sufficient intellect to substitute the calm tenderness of friendship, the confidence of respect, instead of blind admiration, and the sensual emotions of fondness.
This is, must be, the course of nature. - Friendship or indifference inevitably succeeds love. - And this constitution seems perfectly to harmonize with the system of government which prevails in the moral world. Passions are spurs to action, and open the mind but they sink into mere appetites, become a personal and momentary gratification, when the object is gained, and the satisfied mind rests in enjoyment. The man who had some virtue whilst he was struggling for a crown, often becomes a voluptuous tyrant when it graces his brow;* and, when the lover is not lost in the husband, the dotard, a prey to childish caprices, and fond jealousies, neglects the serious duties of life, and the caresses which should excite confidence in his children are lavished on the overgrown child, his wife (...)'

° A miracle, all curing medicine.
¹La Rochefoucauld  (1613-80) Maxim 473
* Naturally this observation could also be applied to modern day presidential candidates.. 

Mary Wollstonecraft was a pioneer, and one can only greatly respect her for what she lived through and accomplished. Had she lived longer than only 38 years however, it's likely that her opinions would have evolved. Shouldn't real friendship - which has to include respect, confidence and trust- be ultimately integral to true love itself? Such love can sometimes last for as long as one lives.
However it's obtained, there's no doubt regarding the merits of further education, but it will never have any profound effect on the essential disposition, the timeless nature of normal men and women, which is just as well.

__

Retelling and conclusion © Mirino. Source and passage- Norton Anthology of English Literature, volume 2. Portrait of Mary Wollstonecraft by John Opie (1790-1) oil on canvas, 100.5 cm x 87.5 cm (Tate Gallery). Portrait of William Godwin by James Northcote (1802) oil on canvas, 79.9 cm x 62.2 cm (National Portrait Gallery). With thanks to Wikimedia Commons. April, 2012

April fool

An April fool of late
Knowing little of cruel fate
Tried hard to create art
To leave behind

But a greater fool than he
Acting quite contrarily,
Destroyed all the art
That he could find. 

Doggerel and images © Mirino. April 1st, 2012