Mediaboss Marketing

PARISJean dOrmesson was born in Paris in 1925. A writer and philosopher, he received the Grand Cross of the Legion of Honor in 2014. I spoke to him recently in Paris about the upcoming elections in France and the rise of populism globally.

Do you see a real possibility that Marine Le Pen and the National Front can win the French elections?

The National Front is clearly making steady progress. I remember when the party of the extreme right in France at the time of [Jean-Louis] Tixier-Vignancour reached a maximum of 2 percent of the vote. Later Jean-Marie Le Pens party gained a maximum of 3 to 4 percent of the vote. But now there is a populist wave all across the world I am thinking for example of Brexit, of Trump, of the Dutch elections and today Le Pen is at 26-27 percent.

For several months Le Pen has been the only candidate to be certain of going into the second round; the others, I am not sure. As I said before Le Pen will have approximately 25-30 percent of the votes but I do not think that she can be elected. She will face the Socialist Party led by [Benot] Hamon and the extreme left led by [Jean-Luc] Mlenchon. If they were united they would represent 25 percent, more or less the same percentage as Le Pen.

Anyway, I think that in the end Le Pen will be defeated. In my opinion, [Francois] Fillon if he is still in the race despite the scandal that has engulfed him or Macron will win the elections in the end. I do believe that Le Pen will be elected in the elections of 2022, but even now all possibilities are open. If, unfortunately, there should be a horrible attack two days before the elections, it would be a catastrophe, and in that case Le Pen could win.

Lukas Schulze via Getty Images

Are the French anxious and worried?

France has changed. For many years it was a country organized into two parties: the conservatives and the socialists, the right and the left. Macron has said correctly that bipartisanship is finished and it has been replaced by quadri-partisanship: Le Pen at the extreme right and the extreme left of Mlenchon, and then the traditional left and the traditional right. But it is not only politics that have changed but also the French people, who were once happy and carefree. As Cocteau rightly said they have become like Italians in a bad mood. The democratic system has been threatened and people are tending towards extremes. The victory of the National Front would be an economic catastrophe the return to the Franc, the closing of borders in short a great chaos.

Brexit and the election of Trump seemed to be unforeseeable events. They are, however, things that have happened.

You cannot absolutely trust the polls today, and also for many years people did not dare to admit that they voted for the National Front. Today, this trend has changed, and people are less afraid to say that they vote for the National Front. This could increase the partys vote to 30 percent.

What kind of a country is France today?

Its a country in bad shape. The five years of the Hollande presidency have been disastrous. He has not kept his promises and he was not able to reduce unemployment and increase the standard of living. Today France may seem to be turning the page, but the danger of terrorism and the problem of migrants is strong. Security is one of the main priorities, and with Le Pen there will be no more migrants because the borders will be closed. A large number of Christians vote for the National Front and I do not understand how they can support a political party that wants to close doors. I have to say that Hollande was better on the topic of security than he was on the economic front.

Do you worry about the world of culture, how are things for French culture?

The French language is doing very badly; it is hard to fight against English. It is also true that books and newspapers are in difficulty. Some publishers are doing well, but there is a negative trend and bookstore sales have been reduced by between 5 to 15 percent. Current events have certainly invigorated peoples desire to read newspapers, and for the moment the freedom of the press is total in France.

And if the National Front wins?

It will not only be a disaster for the poor and for the rich, but it will also affect culture, and the freedom of the press will be threatened.

Do intellectuals still have a voice in France today?

I am not an intellectual, I consider myself a humble writer. The left wing intellectuals went further right than myself. All of France is moving to the right. The Communist Party and the Socialists no longer seem to exist in France. However, writers still have a privileged situation. A writer in France still has a voice in society, although the myth of the great writer, such as Victor Hugo or Franois Mauriac or Andr Gide, no longer exists. The people have violently rejected the political class, all politicians are unpopular and the press is not seen in a very good light. Writers do still enjoy a certain respect.

You are a French academician. What is the role of the Academy of France today?

It does not have very much to do with literature, it is more like a meeting place for interesting people. Neither [Jean-Paul] Sartre nor [Andr] Malraux nor [Albert] Camus were French academicians, but the Academy of France definitely has an undeniable prestige, especially abroad, because it represents a certain French esprit. The French esprit prevailing at the time of Voltaire and Descartes.

One thing remains at the Academy that has otherwise disappeared in France I am talking about conversation. Formerly there were literary salons, but they disappeared. In the last 60-70 years, they were replaced by literary cafes, but now even those have disappeared and conversation has gone with them.

Does France still have a leading cultural role in Europe today?

France follows the destiny of Europe. For centuries the dominance of Europe was total, but I would like to say that culture goes hand in hand with a flourishing economy and military power. Both Louis XIV and Napoleon understood this very well. Tomorrow, the most important philosophers will be Indian, Chinese and Brazilian. The advance of populism is due to the weakness of Europe.

What about the United States?

Who would ever have expected four months ago an America with [Donald] Trump as president? And that is the opposite of what the world thinks about America. In both America and Europe today, there is great hostility toward the system. The real victim of all this is democracy.

What kind of a world do we live in nowadays?

It is a difficult period. The world has always changed, but today it is changing with a faster pace. I am not among those who say that it was better before. In spite of the great success of science it is unequivocally important to save a clear concept of humankind, and to reconcile the triumph of science with humanism.

Do you think that there will be new wars?

There should be no more wars, because we have created Europe, but if populism triumphs, things will change. We absolutely must safeguard the idea of Europe. Europe has succeeded in two things: the single currency and the absence of war. Wars will certainly continue in Africa, in Asia, but we must ensure absolute vigilance against populism. Young people have a tendency to be extremist, but we must prevent them from voting for the National Front.

In conclusion, what is your opinion about your country?

It is definitely somewhat anxious and unhappy. The French language, as I said at the beginning, is becoming less important, and France is not the first country in a Europe that is no longer the center of the world. It is wrong, though, to be talking about decline all the time. What I believe is that Africa will have an increasingly important role. The future is Africa.

See the original post:
The Victim Of Populism Is Democracy - Huffington Post

Is there any party less aptly named than the Liberal Democrats? A truly liberal party would embrace the chance to shape Britains future as a self-governing nation outside the EU, free to trade with the world. And a democratic one would respect what the people voted for in one of the biggest exercises of democracy in modern times. Instead, the Lib Dems want to stop Brexit.

With only nine MPs, the Lib Dems can do little harm in the House of Commons, but there are over 100 of them in the House of Lords, many rashly given peerages by David Cameron to placate his Coalition allies. Those peers are seeking to force the Government to hold a second referendum on the final Brexit deal; they say they will vote against the Bill that will authorise Theresa May to trigger Article 50 unless their scheme for another public vote is written into law.

Go here to see the original:
The Liberal Democrats should learn to respect democracy, even if they don't like the Brexit result - Telegraph.co.uk

Pax Ahimsa Gethen / Wikimedia CommonsA recent Pew Research report looked into what characteristics Americans feel are essential for a strong democracy to flourish. The survey asked 1,503 American adults how important things such as fair and open national elections are in preserving democracy.

Of those surveyed, 89 percent believed that open and fair national elections were essential for a strong democracy, while 83 percent saw having a system of checks and balances as critical. Seventy-nine percent thought that people having the right to nonviolently protest was important, and 74 percent favored protecting the rights of people who hold unpopular views. Only 64 percent thought that news organizations being free to criticize political leaders was essential.

Breaking the data down along party lines shows little difference between Republicans and Democratsexcept on a two key points.

Sixty-eight percent of Republicans viewed nonviolent protests as important, compared to 88 percent of Democrats.

Republicans' lower propensity to see this right as essential is reflected in a recent push to crack down on the practice. GOP lawmakers in at least 18 states have introduced some form of anti-protesting legislation, according to The Washington Post.

Inspired by the North Dakota pipeline protests, state Rep. Keith Kempenich introduced a bill that would make motorists not liable for unintentionally hitting protesters who are blocking a roadway. A bill sponsored by Iowa state Sen. Jake Chapman would make intentionally blocking traffic on a highway a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. Missouri Rep. Don Phillips introduced legislation to penalize anyone wearing a mask or disguise during an unlawful protest.

Civil liberties groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have called the anti-protesting legislation unconstitutional and an "unlawful infringements on our right to speak." As the ACLU notes, some of the bills have stalled (including the one in North Dakota) or been dropped altogether (including ones in Michigan and Virginia).

A 20-percentage-point difference is nothing to sneeze at, but it pales in comparison to the current partisan divide over the importance of the right of the press to criticize political officials. While 76 percent of Democrats believed a free press was essential, only 49 percent of Republicans felt the same way.

Trust in the media has been declining, as noted by Gallup, so it's no wonder both Democrats and Republicans feel journalists' role in preserving democracy is less vital than the role of things like checks and balances. But you still have to wonder at the extent to which President Trump's ongoing feud with the media and the anti-Trump protests of recent months seem to be shaping the views of GOP supporters. It's also hard not to think the results might be flipped if Democrats were still in power.

Link:
How Important Are Nonviolent Protests and Media Criticism in Preserving Democracy? Depends Which Party You ... - Reason (blog)

In the recent film Trumbo, about the blacklisted screenwriterand Stalinistwho helped end the barring of communists from working in Hollywood, a sinister, bespectacled figure threatens a poverty-row filmmaker who is employing Trumbo. Fire him, the sinister figure says, or wewho he identifies as the Motion Picture Alliance For The Preservation of American Idealswill shut you down.

In point of fact, such an incident could have and probably did happen, for that organization did try to enforce the blacklisting of suspected or actual communists from studios. But the makers of this eulogy to Trumbo overshot their mark by having said sinister figure cite Ronald Reagan as one of the members. Reagan, then a liberal, but anticommunist Democrat, was not.

It is readily apparent why the liberal film-makers of Trumbo are trying to link Reagan to an unofficial enforcement branch of the blacklist (although, to be fair, many of the anticommunist members were blacklisted by Hollywood reds when the latter had more clout with the studios). Even before his presidency, an unshakeable assertion by liberals was that Reagan was a right-wing loony enforcing the blacklist against progressives.

But the real Reagan was hardly a proponent of the blacklist; indeed, as president of the Screen Actors Guild, he sought to ameliorate its effects.

Almost alone among the friendly witnesses who testified before the House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1947 regarding communism in Hollywood (the same Congressional group that would help send Trumbo to jail) Reagan advised against imposing a blacklist on communists he had personally battled within the Screen Actors Guild.

Rather than, in the words of actor Robert Taylor, sending them back to Moscow, Reagan instead asserted that the best way to oppose communists was to make democracy work. An example of this, Reagan stated, was practiced in the Screen Actors Guild by insuring everyone a vote and keeping everyone informed.

And this policy Reagan advocated for the country at large: I believe that, as Thomas Jefferson put it, if all the American people know all of the facts they will never make a mistake.

But unlike the majority of right-wingers who testified, Reagan did not favor outlawing the Communist Party. As a citizen, the actor said, I would hesitate to see any political party outlawed on the basis of its political ideology.

Attacking the Communist Partys philosophy, and even more, their tactics, which are those of the fifth column, and are dishonest, Reagan nonetheless didnt want the country to abandon democracy to fight reds: I never as a citizen want to see our country become urged, by either fear or resentment of this group, that we ever compromise with any of our democratic principles through that fear or resentment. I still think that democracy can do it.

Reagans adherence to civil liberties was all the more remarkable considering his run-ins with Hollywood communists during a 1945-46 labor strike in Hollywooda strike militantly and violently organized against studios by communists. As a member of the Independent Citizens Committee of the Arts and Sciences and Professions (ICCASP), a liberal group that helped re-elect FDR for a fourth term, Reagan became uncomfortably aware that over 70 percent of the supposedly liberal membership were hard-line Stalinists.

Along with other anti-communist liberals in the organization, among then actress Olivia De Havilland, Reagan tested the waters by introducing a resolution condemning communism as well as fascism and pledging support to the free enterprise system. Hardline communists denounced Reagan as a fascist and the actor later received a phone call from someone threatening to throw acid in his face. Outnumbered, and unable to convince communist members to allow the resolution to be put to a vote among the membership, Reagan and other liberals, including FDRs son James Roosevelt, resigned.

After testifying before HUAC in 1947, Reagan joined others to try to minimize the effects of the blacklist in a group called The Motion Picture Industry Council. In the words of liberal screenwriter and founding member Philip Dunne, the purpose of the group was to limit the scope of the blacklist, get the blacklisted back to work, and defend those who were falsely accused of communist beliefs.

But such nuance regarding Reagan does not fit into liberal narratives. Because Reagan was anticommunist, even while a Democrat, he has to be a red-baiter trying to deny those such as Trumbo employment.

Here is the original post:
Ronald Reagan: Use Democracy To Fight Hollywood Communism - The Liberty Conservative

Socialism missing from religion: SC The Hindu The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed concern at the threat of musclemen taking over charge of religious assets and properties. Everywhere with temple and church properties there is a problem ... there is a problem of musclemen taking over temple ...

More here:
Socialism missing from religion: SC - The Hindu