{"id":66489,"date":"2005-06-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-06-08T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/06\/08\/le-faux-debat-sur-les-faux-modeles-qui-revele-la-vraie-crise\/"},"modified":"2005-06-08T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2005-06-08T00:00:00","slug":"le-faux-debat-sur-les-faux-modeles-qui-revele-la-vraie-crise","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/06\/08\/le-faux-debat-sur-les-faux-modeles-qui-revele-la-vraie-crise\/","title":{"rendered":"Le faux d\u00e9bat sur les faux mod\u00e8les qui r\u00e9v\u00e8le la vraie crise <\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Le faux d\u00e9bat sur les faux mod\u00e8les qui r\u00e9v\u00e8le la vraie crise <\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t8 juin 2005 Madame Margaret Blunden, qui est Professeur \u00e9m\u00e9rite \u00e0 l’universit\u00e9 de Westminster, \u00e0 Londres, donne un excellent article aujourd’hui dans l’International Herald Tribune<\/a>. Excellent parce qu’il est d’une Anglaise, qui plus est professeur d’\u00e9conomie, \u00e0 ce qu’il semble; excellent parce qu’il \u00e9carte quelques mythes et fait justice de la propagande \u00e9lectorale; excellent parce qu’il permet, a contrario<\/em>, de voir confirm\u00e9 le v\u00e9ritable enjeu de la crise europ\u00e9enne.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tQue nous dit madame Blunden? En gros, elle nous montre l’artificialit\u00e9 compl\u00e8te du d\u00e9chirement extraordinaire qui a secou\u00e9 et secoue la France, et qui s’est \u00e9tendu \u00e0 l’Europe, entre partisans triomphants du mod\u00e8le anglais (lib\u00e9ral) et partisans du mod\u00e8le fran\u00e7ais (social) soudain horrifi\u00e9s de constater o\u00f9 la perfidie anglo-saxonne allait se nicher. Ce d\u00e9chirement s’appuie sur des perceptions fauss\u00e9es, nous dit le professeur de l’universit\u00e9 de Westminster. En quelques paragraphes, elle nous montre que les Britanniques sont sous un r\u00e9gime assez mixte, aussi bien social et dirigiste que lib\u00e9ral, et que les Fran\u00e7ais itou, sous un r\u00e9gime assez mixte, aussi bien lib\u00e9ral que social et dirigiste. Lisons ses explications:<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab The Manichean opposition of these two abstractions, social Europe, the French model, and liberal Europe, the British model, actually conceals the fact that Britain is nothing like as liberal, and France nothing like as social, as the French debate has suggested. Tony Blair’s government has presided over a big shift in resources to the public sector. Britain is raising the tax burden, whereas the trend of other developed economies, outside Europe, is to reduce taxes. The massively increased spending on public services in Britain has resulted, for example, in fewer run-down hospitals and schools, more doctors and nurses, and shorter waiting lists for operations.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The Blair governments have followed a quite aggressive policy of income redistribution. State spending on preschool children, for instance, increased by \u00a32 billion between 1997 and 2004. Children’s Centers have been established in 500 of the poorest areas, to help children whose parents smoke and don’t read to their kids. Britain is an exceptionally good EU pupil in implementing directives from health and safety to employment. According to the British Chamber of Commerce, the bill to employers for implementing new regulations between 1998 and 2005 is \u00a339 billion. It is hard to recognize the hyperliberal Anglo-Saxon model of French imagination in a country with 2.7 million people on incapacity benefit.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb And who would guess that anti-Europe Britain has been quietly playing a leading part in one of the most sensitive and dynamic areas of European integration, European security and defense policy? The government has supported the development of a European Defense Agency, and of an EU capability for crisis management and humanitarian peacekeeping. It has made a strong contribution to most such operations since 2003.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb It is no easier for a Briton to locate the French social model. In the last 20 years, the French have been made to swallow quite large doses of the liberal pill. Financial markets have been liberated, and the capital value of the stock market as a proportion of gross national product has tripled. The number of shareholders in France has increased fourfold. Two-thirds of the largest French companies are now wholly or partly privatized, and the proportion of foreign-owned equity in French firms is higher than that in Britain.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb France is still of course highly regulated, and successive governments, struggling to moderate the rigid labor code and to reduce welfare privilege, have cut and run in the face of direct action. Obstreperous crowds, blocking the streets and paralyzing the economy, amass with frightening speed out of nowhere. This in a country with quite low levels of union membership lower than the United States but a long tradition of throwing up the barricades.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tMadame Margaret Blunden n’a \u00e9videmment pas tort, et cela avec un zeste d’humour cultiv\u00e9 (\u00ab Like Monsieur Jourdain in Moli\u00e8re’s Bourgeois Gentilhomme,’ who was surprised to discover he had been speaking prose all his life, I have been taken aback to find that I have been living in the Anglo-Saxon model<\/em> \u00bb). Ce qu’elle ajoute sur la France, qui concerne les rapports de la France et de la globalisation, est plus ambigu qu’il ne para\u00eet, avec une certaine distance des habituelles et calamiteuses exhortations faites aux Fran\u00e7ais de s’adapter vite fait \u00e0 la globalisation: \u00ab France has not come to terms with the idea of global competition, or worked out how to preserve what is uniquely French in a world distressingly full of people willing to work longer and harder for less money. <\/em>[…] We will all be losers if the French fail to find their own modernity, adapting their unique culture to what is survivable in global terms.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCes mots ne sont pas loin d’\u00eatre une exhortation, bienvenue, celle-l\u00e0, faite aux Fran\u00e7ais de trouver un mod\u00e8le original, combinant les r\u00e9alit\u00e9s du monde globalis\u00e9 avec ce qui est unique dans la culture et le mod\u00e8le fran\u00e7ais. Implicitement, nous avons \u00e9galement la suggestion que Britanniques et Fran\u00e7ais sont, sur ce terrain, bien moins \u00e9loign\u00e9s qu’ils ne paraissent: \u00ab In spite of the polarizing abstractions, the British and French disagree about much less than it appears. Both countries are trying to achieve economic prosperity and growth, while reducing inequalities and protecting the vulnerable, to survive intact in a global environment of ferocious competition.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t… Ce qui nous am\u00e8ne \u00e0 l’essentiel. La derni\u00e8re citation et ce qui pr\u00e9c\u00e8de imm\u00e9diatement nous sugg\u00e8rent effectivement que le v\u00e9ritable probl\u00e8me auquel est confront\u00e9e la France, et le Royaume-Uni avec elle dans ce cas, et la Hollande qui a vot\u00e9 comme l’on sait, et tous les autres lorsqu’ils s’en rendront compte, c’est bien s\u00fbr celui de l’identit\u00e9 menac\u00e9e de mort. Les termes m\u00eames sont parlants: pr\u00e9server ce qu’il y a d’ \u00ab uniquely French<\/em> \u00bb, adapter \u00ab the unique <\/em>[French] culture<\/em> \u00bb, ou bien encore, pour les deux pays, France et Royaume-Uni, \u00ab to survive intact<\/em> \u00bb dans l’environnement de la globalisation.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCertes, il n’y a pas eu le formidable d\u00e9bat sur le r\u00e9f\u00e9rendum, suivi du r\u00e9sultat, suivi du vote hollandais et de la crise europ\u00e9enne, s’il n’y a pas une cause \u00e0 mesure. Seule la crise de l’identit\u00e9 des nations, confront\u00e9e \u00e0 une entropie nihiliste et destructrice, justifie ce tintamarre. L’\u00e9conomie, \u00e0 c\u00f4t\u00e9 de cela, ne peut \u00eatre prise comme une cause fondamentale, surtout lorsqu’on sait \u00e0 quelle pression de propagande et de d\u00e9sinformation sa perception est soumise.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tTout cela est en train d’appara\u00eetre au grand jour, et madame Blunden participe \u00e0 cet effort. On l’en remercie. Il n’emp\u00eache que la question, plus tactique que fondamentale, se pose, de savoir si les dirigeants de son pays en sont compl\u00e8tement conscients, et \u00e0 partir de quel moment ils ne sont pas eux-m\u00eames victimes de la propagande \u00e9conomiste qu’ils soutiennent en leur faveur, comme c’est de bonne guerre. Lorsque Tony Blair juge (\u00e0 tort \u00e0 notre sens, toujours du point de vue tactique) qu’il existe une opportunit\u00e9 pour faire avancer au niveau europ\u00e9en un mod\u00e8le anglais qui n’existe m\u00eame pas chez lui, ne projette-t-il pas, m\u00eame si inconsciemment, d’imposer des conditions europ\u00e9ennes qui forceraient les nations, dont la sienne en premier lieu, \u00e0 sacrifier leur identit\u00e9? Ne favoriserait-il pas une machinerie globalisante (cette fois-ci, l’UE dans son r\u00f4le le plus d\u00e9testable) dont l’effet est de r\u00e9duire en bouillie tout ce qui est singulier, tout ce qui est unique, tout ce qui devrait rester intact?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

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

Le faux d\u00e9bat sur les faux mod\u00e8les qui r\u00e9v\u00e8le la vraie crise 8 juin 2005 Madame Margaret Blunden, qui est Professeur \u00e9m\u00e9rite \u00e0 l’universit\u00e9 de Westminster, \u00e0 Londres, donne un excellent article aujourd’hui dans l’International Herald Tribune. Excellent parce qu’il est d’une Anglaise, qui plus est professeur d’\u00e9conomie, \u00e0 ce qu’il semble; excellent parce qu’il… <\/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":[398,2632,4169,4035,2937],"class_list":["post-66489","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-europe","tag-globalisation","tag-identite","tag-liberalisme","tag-nationale"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66489","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=66489"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66489\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66489"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66489"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66489"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}