the Dreary debate. The first joust of the primary to the left between the seven candidates has left commentators on their hunger. “Vivement dimanche “, a pleasant Yann Marec Midi free, which was found in the first debate airs of being a ” big family reunion. All agree on the merits at the time of the flat resistance and a few squabbles the time of the dessert. The unanimous vote on the policy of François Hollande in the field of security has been an example of solidarity. “It is all the same managed to find a virtue to the evening :” In reality, the debates of yesterday will have served to show where the beat the more strong the heart of the left in the spots of the plateau. In this game, there is no doubt that Be noît Hamon will have scored the most points for the people orphan the broken promises of François Hollande. Vincent Peillon has shown an intelligent vision of the France of tomorrow, while Manuel Valls trying to defend a mixed picture. “But, according to him,” it will take more than that to fix the opinion. The upcoming debates will be used to mark more lines of fractures. “
” The debates seemed to be sanitized, each trying to stay in his lane and absolutely avoiding the controversy and the arrests, ” says Jean-Marcel Bouguereau (The Republic of the Pyrenees). The fault of the rules, outlier of this debate : 1 minute thirty seconds to respond, 45 seconds to respond ! Result, ” a debate hashed, the problems being saucissonnés applicants who have little time to develop or get lost in the details managers. Where was the breath, the vision, the projects ? Fortunately still remain two debates, ” he concludes, in a beautiful burst of optimism.
disagreements background
” It was a debate of economists, serious, sober, more or less serious depending on the candidate, and without major irregularities “, also think Hubert Coudurier in the Telegram. A paradox, because there’s a hell of a difference between the supporters of shave for free and those who want to maintain the large balances. Between Hamon and Bennahmias, in favour of a universal income to the astronomical amount, € 400 billion (two-thirds of all social transfers). Besides the negative effects on the concept of work. Or, Valls, Montebourg and Peillon, aware that the current president has not only paid for the increase in unemployment, but also that of the tax. “
In Alsace, Laurent Bodin also was able to discern between the candidates, disagreements of substance : “in the first question, concerning the balance sheet of the quinquennium of Francois Hollande, the differences came to a head. Montebourg, de Rugy, Hamon and Peillon, have been critical while Bennahmias and Pinel were of the positive points and Valls expressed his pride. The result was the same barrel : Bennahmias and Hamon advocate a universal income that the other judge at best inappropriate, at worst dangerous ; Montebourg wants to repeal the law work, which is one of the markers of the action of Valls at Matignon… even More so than in a primary from the right, almost all subjects gave the opportunity for candidates to differentiate themselves from each other. It is indeed a choice of people, but also of the ideologies to which are invited the supporters of the left in ten days. “
the Same analysis on the part of Bernard Stéphan, in The Mountains. According to him, ” all of this was purring up until the time when the act labor came as the great litigation of the quinquennium. Benoît Hamon and Arnaud Montebourg has led the charge in constructing implicitly the trial of Manuel Valls on this issue. There, we had on the balance sheet and on the real cleavage that runs through the PS. It was at the heart of the debate, one that will influence the choice of the voters of the left. “
basic income : a true debate caricatured ?
“the heart of the discussion” that summarizes Hervé Chabaud in The Union : “In their approach to a society that they believe all rapidly changing because of the breakdown of economic, their approach is not the same. When Benoît Hamon wants to master the transition to avoid the regression, and advocates of the universal income of existence, it is not contradicted by Jean-Luc Bennhamias, but neither Vincent Peillon, nor Manuel Valls and François de Rugy are not in phase on the way to adapt the solidarity in this society, shaken up and sick of unemployment. “
READ also Primary from the left : a debate without tension and without revelation
But on this subject, Laurent Joffrin puts the record straight. Because if the candidates squaring off on Thursday, had the merit to discuss the topic, the terms of the debate were ill-posed, according to him. “Hilarious French left… there she is launched into a debate scathing on the” basic income “, waving symbols, and arguments to the punch, without taking account of the discussions that have taken place since at least thirty years in several countries. The “basic income” was first a philosophical basis and moral : in wealthy societies, it is unbearable that a part of the citizens, whatever the reason, living with an income of misery. The concrete utopia is precisely this : as a member of the human community and as usufructuary of the planet, every citizen has the right to live with decent ways. Limited, small, but decent. This is the perspective opened by the basic income, only sketched with institutions such as the RSA or the legal minimum w age.
Some oppose the great sin ideological : some liberals are talking about the basic income. Vade retro ! We forget to clarify that the liberal project, originally proposed by Milton Friedman, a table on a general privatisation of the social, and therefore has essentially nothing to do with the proposals discussed to the left. Others speak of resignation to unemployment, or the surfers of Biarritz that it would grant to do nothing ; still others of these women that we would like to return to the house. “A debate of a caricature, in a word.
READ also our article Towards a basic income for all ?
Quarrel ego against the backdrop of a failure foretold
According to The World – in an editorial written before the debate, this primary is essentially a question of people. A fight between the candidates ” weak and divided. Weakened because the main protagonists – Manuel Valls, Arnaud Montebourg, Benoît Hamon and Vincent Peillon, have been associated with the exercise of power for five years, and are all in the balance sheet of François Hollande. They will defend with more or less good faith, but they carry like a cross the five years of disillusionment, disappointment and disgrace. They are, moreover, divided by personal rivalries without substance and without end, who give their competition like a cock fight and let evil portent of their final gathering behind the winner of the primary. “
for Christophe Bonnefoy, he thought it was in The Journal of the Haute-Marne that the exercise of the primary is almost impossible due to the deliquescence of the PS. “It is, in fact, on the basis of successive failures, including some of the seven candidates were actors, that have been developed the arguments. Not simple. Much less easy as two men have already realized how the PS was sick and know how to enjoy it. Jean-Luc Mélenchon has the wind in its sails. As Emmanuel Macron, who increasingly thinks that he can create the surprise in April. Suffice to say that the next two debates will have to be a any other content. In any case if the winner of the primary wants to consider becoming the president. “
No comments:
Post a Comment