{"id":66523,"date":"2005-06-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-06-20T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/06\/20\/la-stupefaction-britannique-pour-lhysterie-anti-francaise-de-lestablishment-parisien\/"},"modified":"2005-06-20T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2005-06-20T00:00:00","slug":"la-stupefaction-britannique-pour-lhysterie-anti-francaise-de-lestablishment-parisien","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/06\/20\/la-stupefaction-britannique-pour-lhysterie-anti-francaise-de-lestablishment-parisien\/","title":{"rendered":"La stup\u00e9faction britannique pour l’hyst\u00e9rie anti-fran\u00e7aise de l’\u201cestablishment\u201d parisien<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

La stup\u00e9faction britannique pour l’hyst\u00e9rie anti-fran\u00e7aise de l’establishment parisien<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t20 juin 2005 Il ne nous para\u00eet pas n\u00e9cessaire de lire la presse fran\u00e7aise apr\u00e8s le sommet de Bruxelles. C’est une question de bonne sant\u00e9 (ne pas risquer la naus\u00e9e, des c\u00e9phal\u00e9es, etc.): le vomissement dialectique furieux de l’intelligentsia<\/em> fran\u00e7ais (parisien) contre Chirac, pour l’auto-flagellation anti-fran\u00e7aise et pour l’incantation pour le mod\u00e8le anglo-saxon, suivant l’affront (pas d’autre mot) qu’a constitu\u00e9 le non de l’inf\u00e2me peuple fran\u00e7ais au r\u00e9f\u00e9rendum, est de l’ordre de l’hyst\u00e9rie. C’est une pathologie. On ne discute pas avec un malade de l’esprit, en plus avec l’\u00e2me pauvre au contraire souvent de l’idiot du village. Pour un savoir un peu plus, juste ce qui importe finalement, sur ce d\u00e9lire, il suffit de consulter cet article du Guardian du jour<\/a>, et le ravissement stup\u00e9fait des Britanniques devant cette r\u00e9action fran\u00e7aise, mais ravissement de courte dur\u00e9e, comme on le lit, car les Britanniques savent garder leur sang-froid, au contraire de l’intelligentsia<\/em> fran\u00e7aise dont la haine pour la France constitue un cas clinique int\u00e9ressant, qu’il faut peut-\u00eatre lier \u00e0 la canicule. (Des hospices bien \u00e9quip\u00e9s pour l’intelligentsia<\/em> en cas de canicule? Il faut envisager la chose.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLe ton du d\u00e9but de l’article, la stup\u00e9faction britannique (un instant) ravie devant la r\u00e9action de l’intelligentsia<\/em> fran\u00e7aise, s’exprime dans ce paragraphe (traduisons pour nos amis qui r\u00e9clament des traductions, le membre de phrase Downing Street officials could barely believe their luck as they read<\/em>: les officiels de Downing Street ne pouvait croire \u00e0 leur chance [ou bien : n’en croyaient pas leurs yeux] en lisant la presse fran\u00e7aise): \u00ab Le Monde, the grand old tribune of France’s intelligentsia, declared the summit a \u00a0\u00bbdouble victory\u00a0\u00bb for Tony Blair. Downing Street officials could barely believe their luck as they read that Britain had buried the EU constitution and succeeded in highlighting the anomaly of how the EU spends seven times more on farmers than it does on future projects, such as science and research.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tPlus loin, l’article montre que le d\u00e9lire parisien des \u00e2mes pauvres affect\u00e9es par la canicule ne touchait finalement que mod\u00e9r\u00e9ment les officiels britanniques, qui font montre de sang-froid comme c’est leur devoir. Les pr\u00e9cisions \u00e0 ce point montrent le respect que les Britanniques ont des capacit\u00e9s de Chirac en m\u00eame temps qu’appara\u00eet la suggestion que, sur certains points, une alliance franco-britannique (au G8) est possible, d’autant qu’elle se ferait, comble du comble, contre les Am\u00e9ricains sur des th\u00e8mes comme l’aide aux pauvres et la lutte contre le r\u00e9chauffement climatique : \u00ab While ministers are trying to remain upbeat, they know there will be deep perils ahead when they assume the EU presidency on July 1. The spectacle of a bitter public spat between two leaders will damage attempts to sell Europe and no doubt enrage an already enfeebled Mr Chirac who may be unhelpful during the G8 summit at Gleneagles.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Sir Stephen Wall, the prime minister’s former European adviser, told Sky News that Mr Chirac might lash out. He is that kind of politician. He is a tremendous bully-boy when he wants to be. But it would be very foolish if he were to do that <\/em>[at Gleneagles] because on the main issues that the G8 are going to address the two countries that have most in common are France and Britain.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tLa stupidit\u00e9 hyst\u00e9rique de la presse parisienne n’a jamais \u00e9t\u00e9 autant mise en \u00e9vidence que ce matin, quand on la compare aux jugements britanniques sur le sommet. Pour rappel, quelques appr\u00e9ciations issues directement du mod\u00e8le anglo-saxon qui provoque chez les intellectuels parisiens des r\u00e9actions primales difficiles \u00e0 contenir.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLe Financial Times<\/em> (pas vraiment un ami de Chirac, voyez pourtant ce qu’il en dit<\/a> et de la politique fran\u00e7aise), avec son titre Blair’s tough stance risks UK presidency<\/a>, nous offre un commentaire de bon sens et qui marque qu’on ne c\u00e8de pas aux apparences: \u00ab Tony Blair’s decision to veto the European Union’s potential budget deal on Friday will trigger accusations across mainland Europe that he has seriously damaged Britain’s imminent presidency of the EU.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Back in Britain, the prime minister’s determination to stand up to Jacques Chirac, French president, will elicit the opposite reaction. It will trigger applause from a mostly eurosceptic press that would have vilified the prime minister if he had negotiated away Britain’s rebate on its EU contributions. But by vetoing the budget deal and defending the rebate so zealously Mr Blair will find it harder to guarantee a successful presidency.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Britain is keen to get the EU to approve a wide range of initiatives over the next six months including the start of talks over Turkey’s entry into the EU and passage of the services directive. Having stood up so boldly for Britain’s national interest last night, the prime minister may now find it harder to present himself as a conciliator who can persuade member states to make compromises.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tThe Independent du 19 juin<\/a>, journal nettement pro-europ\u00e9en: \u00ab Though he avoided having to wield the national veto, most other Europeans saw Mr Blair’s summit as little short of a catastrophe. As one official put it: He had quite a few allies on the points that he raised. But you cannot suddenly demand a fundamental review of the EU budget three days before the meeting.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb A Downing Street spokesman admitted yesterday: There will be a bit of anger, but we hope that things will settle down. Mr Blair believes, however, that among Europe’s citizens, if not their leaders, there is majority support for Britain’s pragmatic way of doing business. His officials claim that commentators and columnists in the French, Spanish, Dutch and German press are beginning to recognise that the British have a serious case.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Such an approach means that there is likely to be no reduction in the rancour for several more months. On 1 July Mr Blair takes over the rotating presidency of an EU that has had to put its constitution on ice. Europe is questioning its expansion plans, and is now deadlocked over its spending plans. Indeed, the EU is in the midst of a fierce ideological struggle over its future, heightened by the deep personal animosity between Mr Blair and Mr Chirac.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb An EU presidency is a time during which a country’s prime minister traditionally calls in favours from his counterparts. After Friday night in Brussels, Mr Blair is owed precious few of those.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tApr\u00e8s cette revue de quelques d\u00e9tails, on \u00e9prouve bien peu de consid\u00e9ration pour la presse fran\u00e7aise, qui est de l’esprit d’une midinette qui s’enflamme pour les premi\u00e8res paillettes venues (le mod\u00e8le anglo-saxon) et qui ne semble avoir comme ligne de conduite qu’un m\u00e9pris pathologique pour le peuple fran\u00e7ais, les int\u00e9r\u00eats de la France, la France en un mot. A c\u00f4t\u00e9 de cela, la presse britannique, malgr\u00e9 son hypocrisie, son parti-pris dont on comprend au moins le logique puisqu’il est pro-britannique, appara\u00eet comme un monument de mesure et de lucidit\u00e9.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIl ne fait nul doute que cette situation fran\u00e7aise est compl\u00e8tement extraordinaire. Elle ne peut \u00eatre r\u00e9duit \u00e0 l’anecdote, \u00e0 l’accident. Il s’agit d’une attitude collective marqu\u00e9e par le d\u00e9sordre et le chaos de l’esprit, totalement soumis aux r\u00e9actions les plus \u00e0 vif, totalement soumises aux cha\u00eenes d’une id\u00e9ologie d\u00e9mocratique qu’on voit ridiculis\u00e9e par la d\u00e9mocratie, une r\u00e9volte d’\u00e2mes pauvres et d’esprits faibles soumis au lib\u00e9ralisme apr\u00e8s l’avoir \u00e9t\u00e9 au marxisme (m\u00eame boutique). Le sentiment \u00e0 son \u00e9gard va du m\u00e9pris complet \u00e0 la d\u00e9rision attrist\u00e9e. (Plus l’adresse d’un bon psy, pour ceux qui en connaissent.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

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

La stup\u00e9faction britannique pour l’hyst\u00e9rie anti-fran\u00e7aise de l’establishment parisien 20 juin 2005 Il ne nous para\u00eet pas n\u00e9cessaire de lire la presse fran\u00e7aise apr\u00e8s le sommet de Bruxelles. C’est une question de bonne sant\u00e9 (ne pas risquer la naus\u00e9e, des c\u00e9phal\u00e9es, etc.): le vomissement dialectique furieux de l’intelligentsia fran\u00e7ais (parisien) contre Chirac, pour l’auto-flagellation anti-fran\u00e7aise… <\/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":[4118,2711,2878],"class_list":["post-66523","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-establishment","tag-le","tag-monde"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66523","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=66523"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66523\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66523"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66523"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66523"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}