{"id":65156,"date":"2002-07-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-07-02T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2002\/07\/02\/le-sondage-broder\/"},"modified":"2002-07-02T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2002-07-02T00:00:00","slug":"le-sondage-broder","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2002\/07\/02\/le-sondage-broder\/","title":{"rendered":"Le sondage Broder<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Le sondage Broder<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t2 juillet 2002 — David S. Broder est un \u00e9ditorialiste am\u00e9ricain respect\u00e9. Il est plut\u00f4t de tendance mod\u00e9r\u00e9e, ind\u00e9pendant des deux partis mais plus proche des d\u00e9mocrates que des r\u00e9publicains, surtout dans l’esprit extr\u00e9miste o\u00f9 on trouve ces derniers aujourd’hui. Son article \u00ab A New Questioning of the War<\/em> \u00bb, publi\u00e9 le 30 juin dans le Washington Post<\/a>, m\u00e9rite toute notre attention.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tBroder a effectivement l’habitude d’effectuer des p\u00e9riples int\u00e9rieurs dans le pays, dans \u00a0\u00bbl’Am\u00e9rique profonde\u00a0\u00bb si l’on veut, pour mieux identifier et mesurer les sentiments de la population. Plus que des voyages d’information, on appellerait cela des \u00a0\u00bbvoyages d’impression\u00a0\u00bb, un peu \u00e0 la mode des d\u00e9placements qu’effectuaient ces voyageurs-chroniqueurs aux temps (b\u00e9nis ?) o\u00f9 n’existaient ni moyens de communication, ni moyens d’investigation statistique. Ce n’est pas aussi pr\u00e9cis qu’un sondage, comme un sondage peut \u00eatre parfois faussement pr\u00e9cis, mais cela est souvent bien plus significatif.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tDans ce cas, Broder tire une conclusion g\u00e9n\u00e9rale tr\u00e8s importante : l’\u00e9tat d’esprit des Am\u00e9ricains est en train de changer. Le contraste est saisissant avec une autre chronique de la m\u00eame sorte qu’il avait publi\u00e9e, le 5 d\u00e9cembre 2001 dans le m\u00eame Washington Post,<\/a> sous le titre de \u00ab It wasn’t Pearl Harbor II\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Much of my time was spent with Democrats, ranging from a mayors’ convention to interviews with candidates for legislative and statewide office in all four states. And what I heard convinces me that the nine-month moratorium on dissent from Bush’s war on terrorism is coming to an end.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(…)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The fresh questioning of the war on terrorism is also a phenomenon of the Democratic left. But if I have learned anything in four decades of covering politics, it is to pay heed when you hear the same questions in almost the same phrases popping up in different parts of the country.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb In San Francisco, during a taping of PBS’s \u00a0\u00bbWashington Week,\u00a0\u00bb a member of the studio audience asked the panel why we had said that support for the war remained strong, \u00a0\u00bbbecause I don’t know anyone here who favors it.\u00a0\u00bb The next night, at a social gathering, Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown asked skeptically, \u00a0\u00bbHow do you wage war on a technique?\u00a0\u00bb And, he added, \u00a0\u00bbHow do you ever know when you have won?\u00a0\u00bb At every stop in Iowa, Dean heard similar questions. Many involved not just the war itself but also its effects on personal liberty and political dissent. Attorney General John Ashcroft was a frequent target.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCes changements sont difficilement mesurables au niveau statistique, dans un syst\u00e8me d’ailleurs extr\u00eamement contestable \u00e0 cause des manipulations, volontaires ou non, des orientations des enqu\u00eateurs, etc. \u00ab I am not talking about a shift in overall public opinion, where support for the president as commander in chief remains high.<\/em> \u00bb, \u00e9crit Broder, d’une fa\u00e7on qui pourrait para\u00eetre paradoxale. Mais c’est exactement cela, et c’est bien plus important que toute \u00e9volution d’opinion qu’on puisse envisager.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tEffectivement, il s’agit d’un changement d’\u00e9tat d’esprit bien plus que d’un changement d’opinion. Il s’agit, d’une fa\u00e7on plus large, de la sortie d’une p\u00e9riode d’h\u00e9b\u00e9tude caract\u00e9ris\u00e9e par une mobilisation g\u00e9n\u00e9rale du jugement autour du seul fait de la crainte du terrorisme, d’une attaque terroriste, etc, et qui dure depuis le 11 septembre 2001. Cette \u00e9volution se traduit \u00e9videmment par une appr\u00e9ciation critique de l’action men\u00e9e par le gouvernement ; si elle se fait, elle se traduira \u00e9galement par la prise de conscience critique d’autres ph\u00e9nom\u00e8nes, par exemple (mais quel exemple !) le ph\u00e9nom\u00e8ne de la colossale crise du capitalisme am\u00e9ricaine o\u00f9 l’administration a \u00e9videmment ses responsabilit\u00e9s.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tDavid S. Broder montre, dans le paragraphe qui cl\u00f4t sa chronique (\u00ab Developments in the war will slow or accelerate this change. But you can feel it happening<\/em> \u00bb), une certitude d’impression qui ne laisse pas d’impressionner.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Le sondage Broder 2 juillet 2002 — David S. Broder est un \u00e9ditorialiste am\u00e9ricain respect\u00e9. Il est plut\u00f4t de tendance mod\u00e9r\u00e9e, ind\u00e9pendant des deux partis mais plus proche des d\u00e9mocrates que des r\u00e9publicains, surtout dans l’esprit extr\u00e9miste o\u00f9 on trouve ces derniers aujourd’hui. Son article \u00ab A New Questioning of the War \u00bb, publi\u00e9 le… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[3454,3455,3456,1267,2804],"class_list":["post-65156","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-broder","tag-opinion","tag-publique","tag-terrorisme","tag-usa"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65156","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=65156"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65156\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65156"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65156"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65156"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}