The campaign for the second round of the right-center primary, where François Fillon and Alain Juppé are opposing each other, takes a bad turn and becomes downright nauseous. The fault lies with Alain Juppé, who, to say the least, does not seriously take his position as an outsider, who was persuaded to be the favorite in opinion polls. Not that one cannot, and must not criticize the proposals and projects of François Fillon. But it is a matter to find disagreements, to show the possible consequences of a policy; In short, it is part of democratic life. The insinuations of Alain Juppé, meanwhile, are all different. They pose a real problem for democratic life.
Alain Juppe spreads in various insinuations. As we know, François Fillon did not make mysteries, he is Catholic. His opponent wants to present him what is called a "fundamentalist" and questions his remarks about abortion. The one who responded best to Alain Juppé is Bernard Debré, Fillon's supporter and well-known surgeon, but also brother and son of other Debrés, famous in French political life. In an open letter to Alain Juppe published in his blog, he said: "How can you dare say that François Fillon is against abortion and wants to abolish the law? Be assured that if it had been so, I would not have supported him, I who am a surgeon and have seen the mortal ravages of clandestine abortion. I saw young girls dying in the hospital emergencies that had been aborted in back-shops of faiseuses d’anges. Your affirmation is not only false, but also and above all nauseating. "
Beyond that, there are other Alain Juppé's vituperative insinuations, his outrageous stances that convoke religion in an area where it has nothing to do. That Alain Juppé wishes to state his faith and his status as a Catholic is his right, as it is the right of all, regardless of religion. But that he should refer to the pope in a political debate is clearly outrageous and above all a rare stupidity. He should know that the principle of secularism is opposed to this.
We will criticize without ceasing, and I will criticize without ceasing, François Fillon on what he proposes. Not because his proposals, in particular economic ones, would be "brutal", a word that has little meaning in this context, but because they would lead to a disaster. François Fillon really wants to adapt France completely to the framework of the Euro and, from this point of view, his proposals are coherent. But they are actually catastrophic not only for France, but beyond, for the European countries, they will push them even deeper into the depression.
I have already had occasion to say this, these proposals are equivalent to the policy of Pierre Laval in France, Ramsay MacDonald in Great Britain and Chancellor Brünning in Germany in the 1930s. These policies have led to both economic and political disasters. François Fillon's view is that the Euro is irreversible and allows us to build a common commune in Europe. I say for years that nothing is irreversible, and that the Euro actually leads Europe to its destruction, at first economic, but also political one. The Euro will destroy, if it is allowed to do so, what exists in economic cooperation but also and above all the political cooperation in Europe. I am not the only one to say this, there are colleagues economists or a Nobel prize winner like Joseph Stiglitz.
So these are our differences. As they are, they are irreconcilable. But these divergences do not authorize people, let alone people who in reality share the positions of François Fillon on the Euro and present only hypocritical versions of the policy that he has at least the courage to present clearly, to distort, to misrepresent his words and slander the latter.
I personally belong to those who have not changed, who have always opposed, and for argued reasons, to the rise of a supranational European Union, which, as we see today, is anti-democratic and liberticidal, but above all it leads the people to misery and social regression. The choice is there. And the project defended by François Fillon has at least the merit of setting out the terms of an alternative proposed to us. The 2017 presidential election will therefore focus on the question of the Euro and its consequences.
Originally published in French on www.russeurope.hypotheses.org/
