Sarkozy Reunites With China

Nicolas Sarkozy pulled off another financial success, this time in China. Le Figaro reports on his recent trip that ended on Saturday with a "spectacular consensus":

The misfortunes of the financial markets seem to be bringing good fortune to European-Chinese relations, and to France and China, in particular. The Asia-Europe summit (ASEM) ended on Saturday in Beijing with a spectacular consensus. When he closed the meeting of 43 heads of State and government crushed by the crisis, the Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao used words that Nicolas Sarkozy, in Beijing as as advocate of global finance reform, would not have shunned to use.

The Chinese host to the Europeans hinted that he would support the initiatives of France, currently holding the presidency of the EU, during the next summit to be held in Washington on November 15. Thus, Wen Jiabao judged that only a strengthened international cooperation would allow confidence in the markets to be restored. He insisted on the need to "clarify" the responsibilities of governments, entrepreneurs and market watch dogs. And he affirmed that the world was in need of "financial innovations", but even more so of "controls to ensure financial security."

Note: It is not surprising that China is concerned. The Chinese exports are a huge factor in American and European trade. Most of the things we buy today are "made in China." It would be nice, however, to see "made in the USA" again.

Nicolas Sarkozy has reason to be satisfied. His objective was to wrest a Eurasian consensus in order to operate from a position of strength in Washington. And to avoid the American tendency of watering down discussions by staying within the bounds of mere statements of principle. In Beijing, the French president insisted that he wanted "concrete" decisions. "Everybody understood perfectly that it was not possible to just talk," stressed Nicolas Sarkozy. (...) China, like the other countries of Asia, entertained a wish "that the summit be conclusive, that decisions be made."

Until now relatively untouched by the financial crisis, the Asian countries are today concerned because the first real effects on their economy are being felt. China, especially, fears a serious slowdown of its exports. The matter of reevaluating the yuan, a very sensitive subject for both Americans and Europeans, is left unanswered. Nicolas Sarkozy repeated that it was impossible to speak of financial reform "without speaking of currencies." (...)

Another article related to the crisis, this one from Business Week, indicates that Sarkozy intends to call for an extension of the EU crisis fund from 12 billion euro to at least 20 billion euro. He plans on making this proposal next Friday in Brussels.

Rare Praise For Sarkozy

Gérard Pince, the author of the preceding article, praises Sarkozy's attempts to solve the financial crisis. Pince is no friend of the Sarkozy administration, but he believes that, in all honesty, the French president has done well:

Let us have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge that President Sarkozy has managed this crisis remarkably well, and the measures adopted on the global, European and national scales are moving us in the right direction by saving the banks, and consequently rescuing their depositors.

The guarantees granted to inter-bank loans, and the funds provided for re-capitalization and temporary nationalization, draw their inspiration from the English model. Let us praise also the lucidity of Gordon Brown who allayed German and American fears. Now, all the West is following the same policy.

Note: "Interbancaire" translates literally as "inter-bank", but I am not certain that is a proper translation. It seems to refer to loans made by one bank to another. If you have any suggestions, feel free...

I am more reticent on the obligations imposed on the banks with respect to the financing of individuals, enterprises and territorial collectivities. In truth, the current crisis, being due to an excess of credit, it would be wiser to let the purge go through to the end. However, it is necessary to continue to reform Social Security (the French national health system) and the retirement fund in order to alleviate the obligations of businesses and encourage them to invest. More than ever, the report we issued on the ways growth is slowed down is still valid.

Note: Here he refers his readers to a French-language article at Free World Academy, in which he and his co-authors develop at length two topics: the abolition of the welfare State and promoting investments.

After the emergency measures that aimed to stem the financial forest fire, it is now necessary to deal with the economic crisis of which the scope and duration are still incalculable. In so doing, let us hope that the problem of immigration will finally be discussed. In truth, massive immigration has a primordial responsibility in the current financial crisis.

Note: At this point he refers to the English-language article that was the focal point of my preceding post. He points out that within 8 days after the online publication of this document Google registered an astounding 10,000,000 hits!

He closes with this statement:

The terrible figures under review ought to incite our authorities to end once and for all this ruinous policy.

Note: And here, he links to a very long financial analysis (unfortunately in French) on the economic disaster that is immigration. In this essential study he outlines, both in words and in graphs, the connections between immigration, stagnation of salaries, unemployment, and public and private debt. French readers should know that there is also a brief video in which Pince exhorts his countrymen to realize that they have been lied to and that they are still being lied to. He asks them to spread the document to as many people as possible.

The photo was taken when Sarkozy convinced Bush to attend a special meeting on the crisis sometime in late November.

Note that even though Gérard Pince begins by praising Sarkozy for what he has done, he then moves on to the "sensitive" issue of immigration. I see no signs (yet) that either Bush or Sarkozy intend to end immigration, one of the major causes of the financial collapse. What will it take for them to see that survival is more urgent than being an anti-racist?

Financial Crisis = Civilizational Crisis

The website of French economist Gérard Pince has some thought-provoking comments on the financial crisis. While his main blog is in French, he provides links to Free World Academy, where the same ideas are expanded upon in English. Though there are a few flaws in the English, it is on the whole more than understandable. Here are a few English-language excerpts from his article on the crisis - its false causes, its root causes, and the conclusion:

Summary of the problem:

The globalization has led to macroeconomic imbalances. Instead of dealing with these issues, the US has used immigration to pressure the wages of the native labor force. Since such a policy could restrict the consumption and finally the growth, the government has favored a massive indebtedness to compensate the stagnation of wages. Of course, these policies are the root causes of the financial crisis.

False causes:

Regarding the causes of the financial crisis, most observers invoke the Central Bank’ policy, the government sponsored enterprises (Fanny and Freddie), the deregulation and the financial innovations. According to our opinion, these policies have propagated the crisis. However, they are not the causes of an international meltdown. (...)

The two government-sponsored agencies, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie) bought the bank mortgage debt and sold it to other financial institutions. One could say that they encouraged the housing bubble in bringing cash to the primary banks and in selling the bad papers to the entire financial system. (...)

Some observers criticize the deregulation that allowed the proliferation of financial innovations increasing the opaqueness of the financial markets. Banks mixed bad and good risks into mortgage banking securities (MBS). Then, they mixed these MBS with others loans into collaterized debt obligations (CDO). (...)

For years, the African Americans complained that they were enduring discrimination in the attribution of loans. Consequently, the “ Community Reinvestment Act” prevented the practice of excluding poorer neighborhoods from credit availability. The Clinton administration reinforced the law and obliged banks to lend to minorities. (...)

Root Causes:

The globalization has led to macroeconomic imbalances. For years, the US economy was living on the credit of foreign creditors. (...)

Note: The root causes, including the way in which the U.S. operates continually in the red is discussed in detail. Please see his article. He goes on to remind us of what he wrote 2005:

Once again, we must recall what we wrote by 2005 in our survey Future of the USA: “ Since 1975, practically all the gains in income have gone to the top 20% of households. However, a country, which sells 90% of its production on its internal market, must increase the solvency of the consumers by raising the wages in order to avoid an overproduction crisis. In fact, since the low workers have not benefited of an increase of their wages, the sustainability of the consumer power has been got through the increase of population (Immigration) and the distribution of easy credit in replacement of good wages. Clearly, such a scheme is fragile” . Today, our survey looks like a prophecy!

He explains how indebtedness compensates for low wages:

Firstly, from 2000 to 2007 the personal saving rate that averaged 8% in the previous decades has fallen sharply to 2% and began negative in 2005. Secondly , the mortgage loans were used for financing consumer spending. The fact to use long-term loan to finance consumer spending is abnormal and a business doing that should go to bankruptcy. However, everybody was happy with this process because it supported consumption and growth. Thirdly, between 1989 and 2008, credit card debt almost quadrupled, from $238 billion to $962 billion. Low-income families saw the largest increase but even very high-income families had more credit card debt in 2008 than in 1989. It means that all the operators (State, corporates, banks and grassroots consumers) have strongly encouraged a massive indebtedness.

Once the market turned down, the entire building collapsed and led to a financial crisis. The economic slowdown began in 2006. The housing markets burst and by the end of 2008 the home prices decreased by 30%. In the housing market value, the losses account for $7,700 billions! After the sub prime crisis, we can expect the collapse of the credit card system. (...)

Conclusion:

Instead of looking at a recession, we could see a global economic meltdown and maybe something that we have never imagined. This crisis is not a capitalist or a cyclical crisis. It looks like a civilization crisis.

For years, the US and European consumers have lived on credit because they have not yet realized the consequences of the rise of commodities prices and the emergence of new powers. In spite of many warnings, they have not seen the consequences of massive immigration. The globalization is now going alongside with a third-worldization into our own societies.

Moreover, the globalization started in a mood of moral relativism. We have not realized that Capitalism cannot work without a minimum of ethical values. We did not predict the emergence of a new social class only specialized in laundering of dirty money, and management of corruption. As a result, a new society is emerging. It is not the free society, nor the classic authoritarian society. It is the mafia society. How could we trust in such a society? The lack of confidence is the bitter result of these bad changes.

What Gérard Pince has provided is a thorough overview of the interconnectedness of various economic factors and various bad policies that have worked in concert, in a cause and effect labyrinth, to bring about the current dangers we are experiencing.

The image of someone climbing towards his dream of home ownership is from Fotosearch. In America, we have it hammered into us on a daily basis that the "American Dream" is to own your own home. Actually, home ownership can be a very bad dream. The so-called "American Dream" should include good schools, responsible families, freedom of speech for all (including those who like to say "Merry Christmas"), high moral standards (even if we cannot always live up to them), freedom to walk the streets without fear of being mugged, raped or tortured, etc...

Instead, all they ever talk about is home ownership...

The Perils of Rachida

Minister of Justice Rachida Dati has had to confront several thorny issues recently: overcrowded prisons (64,250 inmates for 50,806 available places), four suicides within the prisons, at least one rapist inadvertently released due to a clerical error, but undaunted, she is proceeding with her plan to release large numbers of prisoners, in order to relieve the overcrowded conditions and... in order to help her boss Nicolas Sarkozy fulfill one of his campaign promises: no more presidential pardons! At least that is what this article in Bakchich theorizes:

(...) Hence, no fewer than 1500 inmates will be released in the jurisdiction of the Douai Appeals Court alone, beginning November 1. The "experiment" will be extended, as of December 1, to the prisons in Béziers, Le Puy, Fontenay-le-Comte and la Roche-sur-Yon.

Specifically, this plan involves freeing those inmates who still have four months of their sentence left to serve. Theoretically, these individuals will be placed under electronic surveillance. In truth, as the two main magistrates' unions and representatives of prison administration point out, there will be no follow-up. Nothing, or almost nothing, has been planned for a follow up to these early releases. Thus, the prisoners will be freed, pure and simple.

The government's double game is obvious. Officially, the government is still applying one of candidate Sarkozy's campaign promises. No more presidential pardons on July 14! he had said. These pardons corresponded, on average, to a four-month reduction of the prison sentence.

But discreetly, and as the winter approaches, they are quickly and efficiently emptying out the overcrowded prisons. The minister is putting out those that she put in - with so much zeal! If that is not a return of the presidential pardon, I don't know what is. (...)

Guillaume Didier, Rachida Dati's spokesman, having read Bakchich, sent a rebuttal. The first part of his message simply denies everything that was said above. The second part goes on:

Here are the facts:

The reduction of prison sentences, and the electronic bracelet, are the best tools for fighting against recidivism and for helping the inmates become re-integrated into society. That is the reason why Rachida Dati, while awaiting the vote of parliament on prison reform, hopes to offer the judges the chance to experiment with electronic bracelets on those who have only four months left to serve.

The decision to reduce the sentence still depends on the judgment of the the court.

It is not systematic, and cannot be applied when the inmate shows signs of possible recidivism, or if he refuses the measure, or if it is technically impossible.

Bakchich, in turn, provides his sources for what he says:

The number of 1500 inmates set for early release was announced by the daily Nord Eclair on October 24, for the jurisdiction of the Douai Appeals Court alone.

Of course, these releases are only an estimate, since they have not yet taken place. The estimate, nonetheless, is based on the combined statements of leaders of the two main magistrates' unions: the USM (right-wing) and the SM (left-wing) who are unanimous in denouncing the conditions for these releases: "To empty out the prisons, after having filled them beyond capacity thanks to the application of minimum sentences. Recently at the Béthune prison we inaugurated a system of automatic liberation of inmates with four months left to serve," explains Dominique Schaffmauser, of the SM (Union of Magistrates), while his colleague from the USM, Loïc Binauld, denounces "the pardon by means of the electronic bracelet as an escape hatch, Dati-style." Finally, the representative of the CGT (General Confederation of Labor) expresses her opinion: "As usual, Rachida Dati makes great declarations but almost never plans for the preparation and the follow-up of her measures."

On another note, Rachida Dati's Ministry of Justice has lost still another employee, bringing to fifteen the grand total of resignations from the Ministry since Dati took over a year and a half ago:

Beatrice Gaffory, head of the department of information and communication, turned in her resignation, because, according to those close to her "she couldn't take any more"...

Source: Le Salon Beige, which has been keeping track of the stream of departures.

Finally, according to François Desouche, quoting Le Parisien, Rachida received an angry phone call this past weekend from Nicolas Sarkozy, who admonished her for the liberation of a convicted rapist named Jorge Montes. The release came about as a result of a clerical error, but Dati did very little to rectify the problem, until Sarkozy himself ordered the courts to send the man back to prison.

"It's up to you to ask the prosecutors to file a request to correct the error," he stormed. "I can't do everything!"

A phone call that speaks volumes about the precariousness of Rachida Dati's place in the government.

A reminder that Rachida Dati has asked to remain at her post until the very last days of her pregnancy. Her baby (whose father is still a mystery, except to insiders in the media) is due in January.

Click the label below for many more articles on Rachida Dati.

Ferry's Legacy

A communiqué from the pen of Louis Aliot, general secretary of the Front National, expresses alarm over some recent comments by Minister of Education Xavier Darcos:

In the October 22 edition of Le Figaro, Minister of Education Xavier Darcos revels an unpleasant truth that says a great deal about the advanced state of deterioration in which French National Education finds itself. By declaring, "If we just manage to teach children to be sociable, to make them listen to each other, and to make them speak a language that resembles French, I will be happy!", Sarkozy's minister is showing his impotence, his lack of ambition and his resignation, as he faces the terrible conditions in our school system.

In 1882, in a letter to teachers, Jules Ferry spoke in these terms about school: "... on the contrary, it seemed quite natural that the teacher, at the same time that he teaches children to read and write, also teaches them these elementary rules of moral life, that are no less universally accepted than those of language or mathematics." One hundred twenty-six years after this noble ambition, and the advent of free schools, and after sixty years of politicized unionism, our educational system is a social, pedagogical and moral failure.

This ministerial admission, cruel but lucid, obviously shows the detrimental effects of a limitless immigration policy, of the formation in our society of ghettoes and separatist groups, and of the rejection of everything that symbolizes France, both her State and her History.

Jules Ferry (1832 - 1893) was the French politician who became the architect of today's school system. Appointed minister of public instruction in 1879, he initiated many liberal reforms including free primary school, secondary school for girls, the requirement for teachers to obey the principle of "laïcité", the creation of a Normal School for girls and an "agrégation" (advanced degree that allows recipient to teach on a secondary school level or higher) for women.

Ferry believed firmly in separation of religious beliefs and knowledge. The former he termed "personal, free and variable" and the latter "common and indispensable to all". He told the teachers that separating religion from moral instruction could not exempt them from moral instruction since this was what gave dignity to the profession.

On a different note, Ferry became famous, if not notorious for these comments justifying colonialism, which was another project dear to his heart and that he promoted actively:

"There is a second point, a second order of ideas that I must discuss as well (...): it is the humanitarian and civilizing side of the issue. (...) Gentlemen, we must speak louder and more truthfully! We must say openly that, in fact, the superior races have a right vis-à-vis the inferior races... I repeat that for the superior races there is a right, because there is a duty. They have the duty to civilize the inferior races."

Those remarks were made in 1885 and caused much controversy then, with the Left, Clémenceau in particular, voicing angry opposition to the notions of "superior" and "inferior" races, and the Right preferring not to waste money on colonization, but to use the money for France.

Victor Hugo defended Ferry's ideas, on the condition that colonization be temporary and that France withdraw later, just as a tutor does when he has accomplished his task.

Ferry, a free mason, led a turbulent private life with many love affairs. He married at age 43, but had no children.

Source: Wikipedia

Jules Ferry, whatever his shortcomings, would be sickened by today's schools. I believe he would reject any connection between what we have now and what he instituted for the French Republic over a hundred years ago. Some try to blame him for the crisis in education today, but he envisioned a vibrant Republic. I do not believe France today is a republic, but a democracy at its worst, i.e., rule of, by and for the most mediocre, if not the most backward. Hence, we have the opposite of Ferry's notion of colonialism, where the colonists raise the level of the colonized.

The cartoon, from François Desouche, says: "Equal opportunity was our priority. Not one of them can read or write."

That is what is meant by leveling - everyone is equally stupid.

France's Violent Children

I'm sure everyone is aware that juvenile violence is no longer limited to teens, but affects more and more very young children. In the public schools we began to realize early on (by the 1980's and especially the 90's) that teachers in the lower grades, i.e., primary school, were experiencing violent and psycho- and socio-pathological behavior on the part of both children and their parents. Even the most "liberal" teachers were shocked, though they should not have been.

This article by Isabelle Hannart of SOS Education (a parent-teacher association, traditional in outlook) was too long to translate in its entirety, but here are some excerpts:

Who would have thought, just 50 years ago, that one day in France, adults, parents and educators would let themselves be terrorized by six-year-old rascals! And yet, that is the hilarious observation published on October 15 by Le Parisien: more than 30,000 kids under 11 rule the schools and terrorize the adults. Insults, bites, kicks or slaps at teachers: these kids poorly raised (or not raised at all) are causing National Education serious and apparently unsolvable problems. A manifest has just been sent to the President of the French Republic by Sonia Imloul, a member of the Social and Economic Council, president of the Respect 93 Association and author of a book entitled Enfants Bandits? (Bandit Children?) about the "violence in children ages 3-13 in the suburbs."

Note: We see that this type of child violence is more prevalent in the ghettoes than elsewhere in France. Respect 93 refers to the notorious department of Seine-Saint-Denis, which bears the number 93. However, it does not take long for the worst type of behavior to contaminate all of society. In America, behavior that was once unthinkable, eventually seeped out of the inner cities and spread to the rest of the country, even though, on the whole, the inner cities are still worse.

Just one of these violent children is enough to paralyze an entire class, explains Maurice Berger, chief of the department of child psychiatry at the Saint-Etienne University Hospital. "We have more and more violent children, who are younger and younger and who strike with greater and greater intensity", he observes. These kids, who sometimes display an "extreme pathological violence" can "explode anytime, at the slightest constraint. That creates permanent tension. Nothing stops a child having a fit, in a hallucinatory state, as if possessed. His face is transformed. His strength is increased tenfold."

Note: He seems to be describing a superhuman (or is it subhuman?) being, almost a vampire, whose strength far surpasses that of a normal human being. I find this amazing. And yet, we all remember the great movie The Miracle Worker, in which Helen Keller (superbly portrayed by Patty Duke) goes totally berserk to the point of resembling a wild beast. But Annie Sullivan was allowed to beat her physically and eventually dominate her. Helen was, remember, very very bright, with caring (if overly indulgent) parents.

Isabelle Hannart goes on:

First question: is it reasonable to educate these children, who have such behavioral problems, in regular primary schools? To what degree do they endanger other pupils? And, can one knowingly allow the teaching of an entire class to be sacrificed because of one child, thus running the risk of creating in his classmates learning gaps that will follow them throughout their school years?

She then describes the causes of such behavior:

"They are kids who live in permissive families, where there are no rules. Quite often there is no father present," says the principal of a school in Strasbourg. "Some parents are in denial, others don't know what to do and give up trying," explains Sonia Imloul.

What are some of the solutions proposed by those interviewed in Le Parisien?:

(They) suggest policies of "prevention", very small classes, anti-violence protocols, the presence of psychiatrists and police in difficult schools, even, as Sonia Imloul suggests, an "office of family organization" composed of teachers, judges, psychologists and parents, or even a "family mediator"...

Only the child psychiatrist Maurice Berger recommends "boarding school in the early years, in a firm educational framework and with a curriculum adapted to the circumstances."

However, Isabelle Hannart rejects this idea, because it implies that the teachers would have to be taught how to physically tame a young person. She points out that no one would dare do this, since teachers are aware that if they hit a child, ever so slightly, they will end up in the police station.

She recommends applying the rules - rules which she says are outlined in the manuel How To Manage a Classroom by educator Olivier Leroy. The manuel has been reissued by SOS Education and is available to all teachers.

What are the ways in which these rules can be applied?:

The means are hardly complicated. They include a scale of sanctions that ends with the definitive expulsion from the school in the event of a serious offense. Moreover, for parents and pupils to assume their responsibilities, the seriousness of the punishment must be felt. So long as the expelled pupil, in the name of compulsory education, is put back into a school similar to the one he was expelled from, the seriousness of the offense will not be noticed.

She goes on to suggest that both pupil and parents write a letter of apology to the school that expels them and a letter of intent to their new school. That parents be held accountable and punished themselves. That they experience inconveniences such as longer distances to travel. And that in the case of a repeat offender, the pupil be placed immediately in a boarding school.

She knows this will not happen:

And yet, it is not towards this type of solution that the Minister of National Education is oriented. On the contrary, he hopes to eliminate any possibility of expelling a pupil definitively. The 75,000 members of SOS Education demand that Xavier Darcos take measures capable of restoring discipline and order to the schools, in the interest of the immense majority of pupils and families, who should have priority over the few thousand disrupters.

And I know all too well that compulsory education will take precedence over... education.

ODS Party Loses in Czech Election

As a reader just pointed out, the senatorial election in the Czech Republic yesterday saw the defeat by Social Democrats of Mirek Topolanek's ODS party, that figured in my recent post on Czech resistance to Sarkozy. This defeat means that the ODS will no longer be able to block the Treaty of Lisbon and that Nicolas Sarkozy may get his wish of staying on as president of the EU, or at least of the Eurogroup. Even if he does not stay, he has seen one more impediment to the ratification of the Treaty removed. Le Monde reports:

(...) One week after the crushing defeat in regional elections, this new electoral defeat considerably weakens the party in power and the center-right coalition, as the country prepares to take over the presidency of the European Union in January.

The Social-Democrats won 23 of the 27 seats in the running, while the ODS won only 3, and the Communists one. The liberals (ODS) who had controlled 41 of the total of 80 senatorial seats since 2006 are no longer the majority in the Senate but they keep control of the upper house thanks to their coalition partners. The Euroskeptics of the ODS, however, no longer have enough votes to block the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon scheduled to be presented to the two chambers of Parliament once the Constitutional Court renders its verdict on November 10.

The weakening of the ODS may also slow down the ratification of the bilateral agreement between Prague and Washington on the installation of an anti-missile radar system on Czech soil, a project that has aroused public hostility and divided the parliamentarians.

The rest of the article describes the uncertain future of ODS leaders.

H/T: Le Salon Beige

Left and Right Move...Leftward

On September 25, in the city of Toulon, Nicolas Sarkozy delivered an address on the financial crisis, in which he proclaimed the necessity for State intervention in the business and banking worlds, and the impossibility of a free market without any regulation. He outlined his plans for France in the current crisis, saying that the French were better placed to avoid disaster because they have less debt than other countries, in particular the United States. Much of the speech was theoretical, but he did indicate that he would not be hiring more functionaries.

However, last Sunday, the teachers' unions, led by Gérard Aschieri (photo), general secretary of the FSU union, accompanied by a brigade of leading Socialist politicians, demonstrated in the streets of Paris against the cuts in personnel and demanded the hiring of more National Education employees. An editorial in Le Figaro, dated October 21, by Paul-Henri Limbert, explains that the goal of the Socialists is to prove that they are more left-wing than Sarkozy, and to prove thereby that he is a "liberal", i.e., a free market advocate. Here are a few excerpts:

A mere financial crisis will not change Gérard Aschieri's mind! The future is frightening, a recession threatens, the deficits will increase... No matter! The general secretary of the FSU repeated yesterday, repeats today and will repeat tomorrow - there are not enough functionaries in the Ministry of National Education. The "mammoth needs more fat", even though the malnutrition of the animal does not exactly hit you in the face. With more than a million workers in the Ministry, France is, among members of the OECD, in the lead of countries that spend the most money on education.

As Minister of Education Xavier Darcos pointed out: "If school were just a matter of financial means, we would have the best schools in the world, since no one spends more than we do." A useless argument in the eyes of the unions that have proven for the past 25 years that as far as conservatism is concerned, they have no lesson to learn from anyone.

Note: French uses the word "conservatism" in the sense of "resistant to change." Therefore the word can apply to the Left as well as the Right.

The noteworthy thing about last Sunday's demonstration was not the crowd of teachers in the streets of Paris, but the conspicuous presence of Bertrand Delanoë, Martine Aubry, François Hollande, Benoît Hamon and of course, Jack Lang.

Note: Mayor of Paris, mayor of Lille, first secretary of the French Socialist Party, Socialist Deputy in the European Parliament and former minister of both Culture and Education in various Socialist governments, respectively.

Obviously they had to show themselves with a group of professionals whose heart beats consubstantially with the Left. But there was something else in this conspicuous support of teachers by the Socialists. It was as if they wanted to corner Nicolas Sarkozy who had announced on September 25 in Toulon that the "State was back." After a period of avoiding any association with a mobilization by teachers, they no longer have this reservation. The Party believes that recent events have proven them right and that the presidential speech was purely opportunistic. Their tactic is simple: they have to demonstrate that the Socialist Party will always be more to the Left than Nicolas Sarkozy, If the President wants to "reform capitalism," Bertrand Delanoë wants to "throw it in the trash."

To reduce the number of functionaries, notably in National Education, is, in the minds of the Socialists, a "liberal" policy and Nicolas Sarkozy, despite his words, is still a "liberal." (...)

The only comment one can make is that, for both the Socialist Party and Sarkozy's UMP party, one can never be too far to the Left. If the Left moves further Left, the "Right" moves further Left, and if the "Right" moves further Left (as it always seems to, both in France and the U.S.) the Left is forced to move accordingly... But nobody ever moves toward the Right.

The speech in Toulon, mentioned above, can be read in its entirety in French at Le Monde. Extended excerpts in English are available at the website of the French Embassy in Washington.

Czechs Defy Sarkozy

Sarkozy's wish to remain the key figure in the EU even after January 1, 2009, when, theoretically, France turns the rotating presidency over to the Czech Republic, has not met with undiluted satisfaction on the part of the Czech leaders. Sarkozy, according to my recent post, wants to remain a major economic influence within the European Union, on grounds that the Czech Republic does not use the euro and that the current financial crisis calls for extraordinary measures. Yves Daoudal reports:

Czech leader reacted swiftly and officially to rumors of an extension of the French presidency and the transformation of the Eurogroup (those countries that use the euro) into a European economic government under the leadership of Nicolas Sarkozy.

"No one can nullify the Czech presidency. You cannot change the official rules of the game unless everyone agrees," declared, in a communiqué, Alexandr Vondra, vice-Prime Minister in charge of European Affairs. This process would be tantamount to a "bypass", even though "Europe has not had a heart attack," he added. Moreover, "if the Eurogroup decides to be presided over by a Frenchman and to meet more often, they probably cannot be prevented from doing so, but it would not be a wise decision. It would be a move designed to divide the EU rather than unify it."

In another official communiqué, Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek also rejected "the speculations of the press on the possible cancellation of the Czech presidency."

And the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Karel Schwarzenberg, declared: "The rules of the European Union do not change and they will be respected. It is true that we are not a great power and that we must deal with the problems confronting our term as president of the European Union. It will not be easy and that is why we are carefully preparing for it."

"The Czech Republic is completely ready to replace France as head of the European Union on January 1, 2009, and to assume its role for six months," emphasized Alexandr Vondra.

Note: A reminder that the Czech Republic has been one of the countries, along with Poland and Ireland, to resist pressures from the EU on numerous issues and to put off the final ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. France, on the other hand, under Sarkozy, rushed to ratify the Treaty, despite its rejection by the French people. Now, Sarkozy, who fought to make others obey the dictates of the EU is the one bending the rules of the EU for his own purposes. The Czechs are simply following the rules.

I liked the wall painting of Charles IV (1316 - 1378), eleventh King of Bohemia, elected the Greatest Czech of all time. The painting is featured at Wikipedia's page on the man who was crowned Holy Roman Emperor in 1355. Among his other accomplishments he was a patron of the arts:

He made Prague the imperial capital, refusing even at the insistence of Petrarch to move to Rome, and he was a great builder in that city, which bears his name in so many spots: Charles University, Charles Bridge, and Charles Square. Prague Castle and much of the cathedral of Saint Vitus, by Peter Parler, were completed under his patronage. Finally, it is from the reign of Charles that dates the first flowering of manuscript painting in Prague. In the present Czech Republic, he is still regarded as Pater patriae (father of the country or otec vlasti), a title first coined by Adalbertus Ranconis de Ericinio at his funeral.

Judges Against Rachida Dati

Minister of Justice Rachida Dati is confronting an insurrection on the part of judges angry over her reforms and her style of administering her office. Since most French judges are left-leaning, and since Rachida herself can hardly be called conservative, it is impossible for me to take sides, or even to see clearly into the nature of this clash. It seems that the trigger of the revolt was the interrogation of several judges, carried out at night, following the suicide of a 16-year-old inmate in Metz. The interrogation is seen by the judges as an attempt to intimidate them and make them scapegoats. An interview with her is scheduled for release tomorrow (Sunday), so for now I'll content myself with these excerpts from Le Figaro:

After several weeks of latent grumbling, the judges dealt a severe blow on Thursday against the policies of Rachida Dati. Several thousand professionals proclaiming "a mockery of justice, democracy in danger" demonstrated in most jurisdictions . A delegation met with the presiding judge of the Cassation Court, Vincent Lamanda and the Attorney General Jean-Louis Nadal. The two highest magistrates of France vowed to "communicate the concerns of their colleagues to the President of the Republic."

From Sarreguemines to Marseilles and Libourne, from Sens and Perpignan to Le Havre, numerous demonstrations were organized on Thursday in the courthouses. In Paris, almost a thousand judges, lawyers, public defenders, prison employees, advocates for the legal protection of juveniles, crowded the front steps of the courthouse, "There were even judges on duty at the Justice Ministry," said a satisfied Christophe Régnard, head of the Magistrates Union (USM). "We have never seen such a mobilization."

Denouncing the "disdain" for judges, and pointing to an attempt at "intimidation", the protesters defended the independence of the judiciary. At the request of the two largest unions, the High Council of Magistrature (CSM) decided to look into the conditions in which the Ministry's interrogation took place. This interrogation did not go down well with the judges who feel they are being used as scapegoats. The CSM will attempt to find out if there were pressures that would compromise the independence of the judiciary.

A brief in Le Figaro describes Rachida Dati as having confidence in the judges:

In an interview set to appear in the Journal du Dimanche (Sunday Journal), Rachida Dati states that she "has confidence" in the judges and minimizes the revolt against her.

"No malfunction in the Justice system is acceptable," declared the minister to a question on the release of a repeat offender convicted of rape. She stressed that "justice is there to punish criminals and assure the safety of all citizens."

Note: The rapist was released in error. The story has been making headlines, prompting Sarkozy to say that he wants the criminal put back in jail.

Questioned on her feelings for judges, she answered, "I have confidence in them and I respect them," recalling that she herself had chosen to be a judge. When challenged that the judges don't like her she answered: "I don't agree."

As for the notion that she is a threat to the independence of judges, she responded: "The independence of the justice system is a fundamental principle. I repeat over and over to the French people: this independence is a guarantee for them."

For an entertaining article in English about Rachida Dati, you can try this one from the Times Online.

Chavez Applauds Sarkozy

Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela, delivered an address on Friday in which he praised Nicolas Sarkozy's plan to reform the capitalist system. Le Figaro reports:

"Sarkozy, you are approaching socialism. Welcome to the club, those are interesting ideas," proclaimed Hugo Chavez on Friday, during a speech broadcast on national radio and television.

The Venezuelan president was referring to the positions taken by his French counterpart to solve the current crisis.

"Sarkozy is a good friend, but he's a capitalist," and yet "his statements bring him closer to our side," continue Hugo Chavez.

For the Venezuelan leader who wants to promote a "socialism for the 21st century", it is "impossible to reform" capitalism. "A new system has to be created, with differences here and there, but it has to be something new. We will probably call it socialism, (...) you will call it nationalism. Well, let's talk about it," declared Hugo Chavez, his words directed at the French president.

Nicolas Sarkozy had "declared that if the capitalist system were not reformed, there would be a revolution on the planetary level. Well, Sarkozy, here in Latin America a revolution already took place some time ago," recalled Hugo Chavez, who had met with Sarkozy during an official visit to Paris late in September.

Two Birds, One Stone

According to Le Monde, Sarkozy wants to lead the the euro zone until 2010. The euro zone refers to those European nations (sixteen in all) that have converted their currency to the euro:

Killing two birds with one stone, Nicolas Sarkozy wants to take advantage of the financial crisis to impose his economic vision of Europe and continue to preside over the EU as head of the euro zone.

Sarkozy's ambition comes as a result of a shared consensus: the Georgian and financial crises have demonstrated that Europe needed a strong presidency to exist: lacking which, it would have been impossible to negotiate with Moscow on Georgia or to concoct a European plan to save the banks. The Treaty of Lisbon not being validated because of the Irish vote, Europe will not have, as scheduled, a stable president of the Council, elected for two and a half years. The Union will continue to be led haphazardly by 6-month presidential terms. On January 1, 2009, it will find itself in the hands of Euroskeptic Czechs, Vaclav Klaus and Mirek Topolanek, whose country is in the midst of a governmental crisis, then Sweden, neither of which has adopted the euro.

Sarkozy announced a road map in December to resolve the problem of the rotating presidency. Since Ireland did not ratify, it is impossible to act on the level of the Twenty-Seven. But it IS possible to get around the Czechs and the Swedes, by meeting on the level of the sixteen leaders of the euro zone, as was the case October 12 (...)

Sarkozy sketched out his proposal before the European Parliament explaining that "a meeting only of the finance ministers does not rise to the level of the gravity of the crisis." According to him, only the heads of State could decide on the 1.800 billion euro plan to save the banks. This plan constituted a "turning point in this crisis." The periodic meeting of this group (the Eurogroup, i.e., the sixteen nations with the euro) would constitute a "clearly defined economic government of the euro zone."

The Eurogroup has no juridical existence and can therefore have a president without the need for a Treaty. The most audacious solution for leading this forum would consist in holding an election. The second, and simpler one, would be to decide that France should continue to exercise the presidency over just the euro zone, until the EU is presided over by a country that uses the official currency, which will happen on January 1, 2010, when Spain takes over. (...)

Besides the Eurogroup, Sarkozy would like to use a similar argument to preside over the Union for the Mediterranean until Spain takes over the EU: Sweden and the Czech Republic are not on the Mediterranean.

Nicolas Sarkozy did not warn Angela Merkel before he gave his speech. He awaits her reaction. The Chancellor would have to agree to meetings at the highest level of the euro zone, even though Germany has always hesitated to accept an economic government. She would also have to agree to a Sarkozy presidency.

A quick look at the readers' comments reveals that many of them agree with and are thankful for Nicolas Sarkozy. They perceive him as an activist president who is freeing France from the shackles of the United States and transforming her into a key element of another superpower - the EU - for the unambiguous purpose of surpassing the USA. Here is just one example:

- He is right and it would not be the first time. Globally, our European Union is behind the USA. It must regain its leadership position by taking advantage of the extinction of American supremacy. We need a true Statesman (one who points in a direction, states a goal, and does not turn away. Above all one who accepts responsibility...) and I think that among the European or French leaders there is only NS. (...)

H/T: Le Salon Beige and Bruxelles.Blogs

Violating His Own Dogmas

If you follow the Washington scene you know that President Bush met last weekend with Nicolas Sarkozy for a discussion on the financial crisis. Since neither leader showed any sign of acknowledging the major cause of the crisis - the pressures put on lending organizations to grant bad mortgages to "poor" people, i.e., minorities, immigrants, single mothers, etc... most of what they said was sheer rhetoric. However, Sarkozy is being called to account for his words by two conservative opposition leaders: Bruno Gollnisch of the Front National and Philippe de Villiers (photo) of the MPF (Movement for France). Le Salon Beige summarizes the debate and provides links to longer articles:

While Nicolas Sarkozy advocated an even more supranational Europe through the creation of an "economic European government", Bruno Gollnisch delivered an address to the European Parliament in which he forced the current president of the European Union (Sarkozy) to come face to face with his contradictions:

"Your very actions, Mr. President, show how incapable the Union is of resolving the crisis that it could not or would not foresee. You met with four (not 27!) nations on October 4, you participated in a bilateral meeting with Germany on the 11th, with only the members of the Eurogroup (euro zone) the 12th, with the President of the United States on the 18th to persuade him to organize still another meeting, theoretically to restructure the System, to which only six of the 27 States of the EU would be invited, along with the U.S., Japan, Russia, India and China!" (...)

But Bruno Gollnisch also proposed an alternative to this nation-destroying Europe:

"Mr. President, the path to follow is different: it excludes neither European consultation ("concertation") nor industrial and cultural cooperation. But it implies a radical rupture with the global system, the complete reevaluation of the so-called benefits of the universal mixing of peoples, goods and capital, the unequivocal defense of our independence and our identities. This does not mean isolation: on the contrary it is the necessary condition for the return to the world of our nations' influence.


Philippe de Villiers, also addressing the European Parliament, made many of the same points:

In one minute, Mr. President, I would like to say that you have been forced, during this financial crisis, to violate the dogmas of the institutions of Brussels, Frankfurt, competition, Maastricht standards, world-wide policies of free exchange, the ban on State aid to businesses, especially banks, etc...

You brought up a moment ago the affair of sovereign funds which is extremely important to save our businesses in the future, when their value diminishes to a dishonorable level, since this is already the case.

Today, Mr. President, the Treaty of Lisbon that European leaders and you yourself in particular are trying to keep alive artificially, this Treaty should have prevented you from doing what you have just done. It forbids all restrictions on movements of capital, it forbids all interventions and all political influence on the Central European Bank and especially and above all State aid to businesses.

The question is simple. What path, Mr. President, are you going to choose: to have your hands bound, or free? In order to have your hands free, we do not need the Treaty of Lisbon, but a Treaty that takes into account the lessons that we have just learned together.

This was Nicolas Sarkozy's ironic and self-serving response to Philippe de Villiers:

(...) Perhaps it is necessary to free ourselves from dogmas that have done great harm to the idea of Europe, dogmas that are often even more illegitimate when they are not the product of decisions of democratic, hence legitimate, organisms. And in Europe, the European ideal, to which I adhere, is strong enough for European democracy to be a true democracy. Official thought, dogmas, habits, conservative attitudes have done a great deal of harm. (...)

Note: A strange comment from him. The Treaty of Lisbon, by the definition he gives above, is therefore illegitimate! It was rejected by France and Ireland, among other countries. Then he goes on to denounce "official thought", one of his specialties, and finally he blames "conservative", i.e., inflexible, attitudes, even though he calls himself a "conservative". Very confusing.

He goes on to a sarcastic remark about Villiers:

Monsieur de Villiers, yes, I violated the dogmas because I believe in pragmatism (...) I am in a good position to know that the Treaty of Lisbon is not a marvel or a perfect document. Anyway, Monsieur de Villiers, except for Vendée, perfection is not of this world. (...)

Note: If it's not a marvel why did he hasten to push it through the French Parliament in the face of his fellow Frenchmen who had rejected it? Indeed he is in a position to know it is not perfect, now that it has proven itself to be "perfectly" useless!

And why the sarcasm about Vendée? Vendée has enjoyed more prosperity that many other regions of France, thanks in part to Villiers' governance.

He goes on:

As for having a free hand, dear Philippe de Villiers, my answer applies to you! It is the response of a man who is free, even in French political discussions. I think that the most important thing for us is to stop beating around the bush. I think that good compromises are made by sincere people who follow through on their ideas and that the defect in European political discourse is the passiveness that has struck all of us, all political stripes, as if they are paralyzed at the idea of doing something different.

Note: Is Sarkozy trying to project onto Villiers his own mistakes?

He refuses to accept any personal responsibility. Instead he accuses EVERYBODY, including Villiers, of doing what he does. They're all guilty - a good way to escape blame, but does anyone take him seriously?

Finally:

If Europe has advanced, it is because at a given moment, women and men have opened up new territories. And the self-criticism that you are asking of me ought to be done by everyone. For a longtime, in Europe, we have behaved as if we were immobile. We followed the founders, but we did not do as they did, we did not open up new routes, or generate new ideas. I believe deeply that at the point where we are now, it is going to take some imagination, and that at bottom, the worst risk today is that of not taking any risk, and of not being audacious as we confront a totally new situation.

Note: What Sarkozy means by "audacious" is that he must continue to preside over the European Union even after his term expires on January 1. See the next post.

Speaking of Languages...

I have discovered an informative new English-language website for anyone interested in the French language. Called The World-Wide Decline of French, and administered by a gentleman named Unfrench, it chronicles the decline of the French language and the ineffectiveness of costly and conscientious programs initiated by the French government in its misbegotten effort to rescue and promote the language of Molière.

Click the arrows under Blog Archive on the right side to get a list of all the posts. The titles alone are depressing. There are about 173 posts for 2008.

How can Third World countries that speak a rather limited French, and that have more urgent economic problems to worry about, save the language? How can schools teach French if the overwhelming number of students demand Arabic or Spanish or Chinese? Above all, how can French compete with English?

The only factors that propel a language from mere street talk to the level of a great cultural asset are the men of genius who write great literature, the poets who open new avenues of expression, leading to a higher level of consciousness, the artists, musicians, essayists, playwrights, actors, journalists, commentators, teachers, scholars, etc... all of whom use, manipulate and enrich the language with individuality, and at the same time with national pride.

Such men are inspired and inspire others. But how to bring about a return to cultural excellence in this time of spiritual impoverishment? How to generate inspiration? Lawrence Auster, who was responsible for my discovering the site, has some suggestions:

To paraphase Obama's "spreading the wealth," what they're doing now is trying to save French by "spreading the French," instead of by elevating it. Meaning, improve the quality of French among the French people. Teach great literature. Instill love of France and French culture, so that the French have something worth talking about again. Make Muslims unwelcome and start pushing them out, thus re-invigorating French identity. Dismantle the EU and the entire managerial, liberal, egalitarian, and Eurabian agenda and consciousness, which kill the mind, turn language into a PC tool to conceal instead of a tool to communicate truth. Bring back belief in truth, so that there will be things worth saying again, worth using language well for. Focus schools on 17th century French literature with its clarté. Make clarté, love of truth, love of France, love of the historic West, and, even better, belief in Christianity, which is all about TRUTH, the center of French culture.

Note: "Clarté" means "clarity". French was always said to be the language of "clarté". There is also the implication of light because a language that is clear sheds light on a problem. The old saying went "ce qui n'est pas clair n'est pas français" (what is not clear is not French).

Once French nation and culture and its Western identity have been saved and revived, and once the French used by the French people has been improved and purified, then start to make French attractive again to other Westerners. Forget about trying to make it attractive to Third Worlders. As you suggested from the articles at that site, such efforts do not avail. Accept the fact that France cannot have an empire again, that trying to have a Muslim empire only Islamizes France, but see that French can still be saved, because the greatness and beauty of French can still have a great appeal to fellow white Westerners. Thus encourage French as a universal second language in the West alongside English. It won't be as widespread as English, of course, but the unique beauty of French and the "high" of speaking it gives French an appeal that English can't match.

What do you think?

I responded that I agreed completely with his ideas but didn't think it would happen. However, I added that my more fatalistic view is not to be taken as a prediction. One never knows how things will evolve. After all the Renaissance was ushered in by disastrous events. That could happen again.

I would add a couple of ideas to what he said. First, start teaching LATIN again, and even Greek, if you can find students willing to make the effort. Second, STOP teaching French children the "global" method of reading. This language-destroying method has had a demonstrably disastrous effect on the way the formerly well-educated French spell, conjugate verbs, and express themselves. This applies to the teaching of foreign languages as well. Third, STOP teaching French to foreigners via the "global" (or "audio-visual-lingual") method. This method can lead to chaos. Language study for older students has to be structured and grammar has to be taught systematically, whether the students like it or not. Then it is easy to make the transition to structured speech, and eventually to everyday speech. (Note: the final step to authentic everyday speech at normal speed is never easy.) Foreigners are not learning French any better than the French are learning their own language.

If anyone has other suggestions, please let us know.

Of course, the very young learn languages quickly, and grammar can be put off, but not eliminated. The illustration of Jemima Puddle-Duck in French (Jemima Cane-de-flaque) is from Barnes and Noble. Such a translation can be used for both French children and those learning French.

Remember when Winnie The Pooh came out in Latin (Winnie Ille Pooh)? It was a huge success and it sold out immediately. Everyone thought that a new era in the teaching of Latin had arrived. But today, the downward spiral of education having taken its toll, Latin is rarely taught, although it hasn't entirely disappeared. Winnie Ille Pooh may be a good example of making Latin "fun", but it also shows that making something "fun" does not save it. Quite the contrary.

A return to the teaching of the classics is one very good way of re-stimulating interest in the languages of Europe, including German and Castilian Spanish, which is very difficult - has anyone tackled Don Quijote in Spanish? The original version used to be read in American universities, but that would be very rare today. However a solid background in Latin would facilitate access to the great literatures of Western Europe. (Note: I do not know Latin. I studied it too late in life to retain it. I did go a bit further in Greek, but I would need supervision and grammar review if I were to go back to reading Homer. Not being classically trained is a major handicap, IMHO.)

As for German, it was quickly phased out (again, not entirely) after 1968. Nobody was willing to make the effort. Dumbing down the mind, and jacking up the grades became the unexpressed and inexpressible goals of American education.

Finally, what would happen if we suddenly began making intellectual demands on hedonistic young people, or people from different cultures who simply do not have the background to do rigorous work? Would there be violence? Is dumbing down a defense against revolution? Would it be better to just close the schools? I have often thought so, but people turn in disgust from such suggestions. They say "education is our future." That's what we all fear, isn't it?

"Immigration is a Moral Necessity..."

Former deputy in the French National Assembly, from 1967 to 2004, Jacques Barrot was one of the founders of today's UMP party, an institution that claims to be conservative. UMP is the party of Nicolas Sarkozy, who is known to the media and the world as a politician of the "Right." Barrot had previously supported Jacques Chirac, and before that had been a leader of the centrist movement. Since 2004, Barrot has been a European Commissioner.

This article from Yves Daoudal gives the first and last questions from an interview with Barrot posted at Café Babel. Daoudal says that Barrot's answers reveal the European suicide that is underway:

- Does Europe need immigration?

- Yes. The demographic situation of Europe requires a migration that must be concerted. Europe's mission is also a desire to facilitate exchanges between countries. Immigration is both an economic and a moral necessity.

- Islam is perceived by some as incompatible with European values of democracy, peace and equality of the sexes. What is the EU's position with regard to this problematical situation? (Question from Roman Moravcik, a Slovak journalist)

- This way of looking at Islam as antagonistic to European values is a totally partial and erroneous view. Islam is a monotheistic religion that seems to me to be compatible with our principles of laïcité. What is not compatible, are all the fundamentalists, not only Islamic, who wish to segregate and exclude other religions. As soon as pluralism is accepted by Islam, in any case in Europe, Islam is welcome. What IS true is that we will always fight against the fact that in the Islamic milieu Christian communities are not always respected as they should be. But that is characteristic of a certain number of Islamic States, it is not characteristic of Europe. Europe favors religious pluralism and it is obvious that if Islam wants to exist in Europe, it must accept this pluralism.

Daoudal's readers express their anger:

- Daoudal is right. This truly reveals a suicide.

This guy is the archetype of the majority of our elite. He is himself the son of a distinguished father, a deputy, he has been minister several times, he helped create the UMP, etc... What he thinks, what he says is the reflection of what all those in power think and say. That is what is terrifying. These people are burying France and her people ("the demographic situation in Europe requires a migration that must be concerted"), without even considering the issues of French birthrate, abortion, French identity, her religion.

I loved this sneaky attack ("...all fundamentalists, not only Islamic...") against traditional Catholics. (...)

Note: Jacques Barrot uses the term "migration", a word I see more and more as a substitute for "immigration." I guess the latter sounds more "discriminatory" than the former which, in its vagueness, refers to a natural and predictable process. When he does use "immigration" he speaks of it as a "moral" good, hence to be against it is to be immoral.

Note: When I first prepared this post, the interview at Café Babel was unavailable. However the link is now working. Here are a few more exceprts:

- Early in October, Chancellor Angela Merkel thanked the first immigrants , during the ceremony "Germany Thanks You." Can you conceive of such an event on a European scale?

- There are many such symbolic acts that could be imagined to show the immigrants that they really have a place here. We will probably work out this type of ceremony when we have written the new directive on the conditions for welcoming refugees.

- The European policy of immigration is not founded on gratitude. Critics reproach you for constructing a "European fortress".

- We have emerged from a security-driven period when borders had become an obsession. Today, the pact on immigration that the French presidency (of the EU) has had adopted is a balanced agreement where one finds both the legitimate desire to turn away illegal immigrants and that of a Europe more dynamic in the way it welcomes immigrants.

- (...) Concretely, how did you convince Zapatero to sign the immigration pact since Spain benefits fully from immigration?

- Mr. Zapatero, like the majority of heads of State, knows very well that what happens in one of the member States has an effect on the others, and that the States are condemned to stick together in solidarity. (...)

Note: I like the word "condemned".

He goes on in the interview to describe how immigration will be strictly regulated so that each member State can determine the number of immigrants it needs and each donor State (African or Asian) can determine the number of skilled workers it can spare. He says that forcing illegals to return home is not to criminalize them, pointing out that the new directive will outline the appeals process they will be entitled to, and will monitor the conditions in which they are detained (i.e., confined in some kind of prison). He also believes that they should be induced to leave voluntarily in exchange for compensation. (In other words, they will not be sent home?)

In all, a Utopian plan, founded on the false premise that human beings are statistics, numbers, interchangeable pawns on the great European chessboard. Not a word from Barrot about using Europe's own resources or stimulating a restoration of traditional nations. Not only is anti-immigrationism immoral, but, for Barrot, securing borders is a thing of the past now that the danger has been removed!