4 billion of dollars of aid promised in 2007Such a level of excellence is not improvisedI thedo so with conviction and enthusiasmHe had that Boeing buys 5 of the EADS sharesthe rise of this debate in the United StatesA rule which is not about to be dethronedThe microbiological analysis of urine is 6It is true that the flights are usually longerSince the annual low point on 14 June at 5But most existed already before the crisisFriday, September 22. I am buying newspapers at the crossroads booth. The one is common: it is question of rupture, the dispute or the war between the likely nominee of the UMP, Interior Minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, on one side, and the judiciary on the other. Polemics, explanations, indignation, or requirement of resignation. And nothing on the Socialist party announced candidate. Ah if! I need to look for. On the battery door, "Gala", a large photo on the first page, the head slightly reversed back, titrated "Ségolène diary". A record of a few pages, on the family and the House of campaign a sort of publi-reportage consenting, and not a paparazzi fierce indiscretion. Curious reversal of history: the putative candidate of the right for full debate policy, candidate of the full exhibition people left. So where this left which could love critical thinking, skepticism activist media and polls, the taste for the substantive discussion Royal Gala. The fructiculteur confirms me that it is available from September to may...
Beyond this troubling comparison, the controversy over the relationship between police and justice, Interior and Chancery is hardly new. It is located in the order of a judicial chain made of positive and negative voltages. Never a police officer doesn't like to be confronted with the man that he was arrested and that justice was released. In this case, this debate expressed a consubstantial voltage to our democracy. With Chevenement inside, left did in had not been exempted. Each course smiles of the support given by Jacques Chirac to the absolute principle of the separation of powers backed the independence of the judiciary, a few days after the appointment of Laurent le Mesle. Without returning to Montesquieu, often invoked incorrectly on these occasions, should be more thinking to what is a judicial policy and including a criminal policy.
This Government, like others, denounces the magistrates over the events: it vitupère their severity with the Outreau case to deplore their laxity in the lower recidivism of an offender released too early. The principle of the separation of powers prevents no Government to develop a criminal policy and set priorities in the allocation of resources and to focus on targets. For example, when was created the financial center of the Paris Prosecutor's Office, it was to give another scale in the fight against financial crimes. The independence of the judiciary must be saved in all individual cases, but even of the keeper of the seals in a Government means that particular criminal and judicial policy must be formulated.
Within these general issues, the intervention of Nicolas Sarkozy suggested a criticism which is not only the question of the judiciary, but more generally the political rhetoric and its temptations. I do not think that Nicolas Sarkozy is a "dangerous" man, like as the repeat opponents, to scare or frighten the French. However, he likes the arguments based on the stigma. It was already sensitive in his major speech of the year including Douai , this was clear in statements concerning judges. Of course, it was not all judges, but cited eloquent figures on the riots in 2005, showing that, in fine, only one person had been sentenced in Bobigny. The example is obviously strong when we keep car fires and destruction of public buildings, including the images had been extensively disseminated. Stigma is always to give an example that marks opinion, dismay and immediately adhere to the General argument that fits the item of stigma. It is not surprising that surveys a few days after give reason to the Minister of the Interior against the magistrates. This is the effect of stigma to the opinion of his side. The result can be satisfactory in the short term, it is more questionable in the medium term. The force of words added to the support of opinion is still pointing to a social body or professional. I have experienced this phenomenon when I worked with Claude Allègre. The opinion approved the force of his statements stigmatizing any particular example of absenteeism. But gradually, the Faculty supported over the slightest criticism. Surrounded by their Minister and opinion, every time, all the teachers felt concerned by a remark which was only a few deviant cases. After some time, the Minister becomes inaudible. And the illusion of polls may be thinking that the method is good. As Plato, the major threat to democracy, had already noted this is flattering, empirical, routine rhetoric. Opinion is always a certain pleasure to indignation. The outrage is pleasant and people conversations. One feels always virtuous to be indignant a bad action. As Nietzsche wrote, "you're bad so I'm good".
Early this year, the judicial school, judges had been shocked by the unbecoming attitude of the Prime Minister, which had prohibited Guy Canivet his annual speech. It is the same Guy Canivet, unanimously respected, coming in the Elysee Palace to ensure that the head of State well supports the judges...
Stigma is a permanent temptation of political rhetoric in a democracy. It does not necessarily share of bad intentions, since it is often impensée as such. The feathers or Negroes who write speeches are always proud to have found the examples or the number that will be introduced the opinion. The speaker commends most of the time. In this case, Nicolas Sarkozy may specify that he has never "attacked the judiciary in General". This is true. But the main effect of stigma is an angry response of a profession who perceives as much impact on the view that the attack, even point. Stigma preferred the inductive approach to deductive argument: the shocking case is the passage of the individual in General. It works as well in the opinion as it is lived by a profession or a group. Immigration, crime, insecurity threaten other subsequent stigma. It is a political, but also tactical choice to make the heart of its arguments. As the stigma of stigma one master. Polls are fleeting, grudges are tenacious. More generally should resign as Sollers, the image all that would condemn our democracy to flee the nuances and deserting the argument Would us be more than people or stigma
