#bayrou

[cjrae]

Tragedy of the Jade Nightingale. Or: My thoughts on Vol. 11 of the Apothecary Diaries.

Given that this volume just came out in English a few days ago, spoilers under the cut!

I usually think of the Apothecary Diaries volumes as pairs - usually two volumes make up an arc. If so, Volume 11 will be the first half of the arc with 12, but it also functions beautifully as a tragedy in it's own right.

** I will be only discussing information appearing officially through Vol. 11. Yes, I have read the fan translations of the web novels, but given that details can change, until it appears in official English translation, I won't yet be including it here.

The Hero

Gyoku-ou. Talk about someone who thinks he's smarter than he actually is. We knew this guy was a threat all the way back in Vol. 8, with how Gyokuyou reacted to her brother's letter and his veiled insult of sending a younger version of herself to catch either her husband's attention or the Imperial Brother's. Now we get to see him in action and he's scary - right up until he's not.

This man is charismatic as anything - he understands what makes people tick on both an individual level as well as a social level. His ability to wield a mob effectively makes him extremely dangerous, but I'm oddly put in mind of Lakan's initial impression of Fengxian. "This woman is strong, but she only knows how to fight in her own, small world."

The world Gyoku-ou inhabits is a very small, petty one. You can see it in his conspiracy theory about Jinshi's birth.

Jinshi is one of two people Gyoku-ou fails to read. When he brings Lakan and Jinshi to his puppet council to gauge support for attacking Shaoh, he thinks he's got a young malcontent in his hands, someone who wants power and is prone to the flashes of temper and insult that often drive young men. Someone who is easily manipulated. Instead, Jinshi mops the floor with him in that meeting, cutting Lakan's support out from under Gyoku-ou and making it clear that his priority is peace above war.

This doesn't take away from Gyoku-ou's political genius - this meeting teaches him that Jinshi has to be maneuvered around, rather than maneuvered directly. If the Imperial Brother doesn't want to play his part, then too bad. Gyoku-ou will see to it that Jinshi is hedged in all directions except where he wants him to go - which is to war. And even then, he's got a fight on his hands as Jinshi fully takes advantage of Empress Gyokuyou's information to undercut Gyoku-ou's support within his own family.

It's a mark of Jinshi's political skill that Gyoku-ou's move in that family council is to flirt with treason. If he can't maneuver the Imperial family through Jinshi, then he shifts tactics to turn Jinshi (and the rest of the Imperial Family) into the villain of his piece - a prince born and raised into utter depravity.

Let's just sit with what Gyoku-ou suggests to the rest of his siblings (minus the Empress) in that meeting. He implies that the Emperor impregnated his own mother in order to produce an heir. A son that he loves so dearly (and unnaturally) that he would willingly look the other way while Jinshi murders his other children in order to make sure that his brother-son-lover succeeds the throne.

This is a brilliant examination of how the bare facts of the situation can be construed by people with very different motivations to fit whatever worldview is most convenient for them. I'm a fan of the palace politics in this series because they feel very real.

Gyoku-ou doesn't lie once. But boy does he create a narrative that suits his purposes and dares anyone (namely Rikuson) to tell Jinshi. He is escalating the situation and he's doing it fast, while also challenging the legitimacy of the Imperial Family. A fact which, if it does get back to Jinshi (or the Emperor), could get the entire new You Clan wiped out just as fast as the Yi Clan was. This scene functions as a microcosm of Gyoku-ou's two fundamental character flaws; his short term thinking and his utter self-absorption.

Becoming The Wind

Since Rikuson was introduced in Vol. 5, he's been a mirror for Jinshi. He's a "pretty boy," calm under pressure, fundamentally kind and decent to other people while also being extremely competent at his job. Unlike Jinshi, he's also a bit older and more mature. He also clearly admires Maomao and sees the qualities that make her exceptional, despite her various masks.

As it turns out, Rikuson mirrors Jinshi in another important sense too - he also has a secret identity. The Yi Clan were the de facto royalty of the Western Capital and Rikuson is one of the direct survivors of the clan. He was never in the line of succession given the Yi Clan's matrilineal structure. But they were quick enough to save some of the children, namely Rikuson and Empress Gyokuyou's three ladies in waiting, Haku'u, Koku'u and Seki'u.

Rikuson, who was Gyoku-ou's excuse to trick His Former Majesty into giving him the authorization to destroy the Yi Clan. Rather than truly being an bastard Imperial prince, he's a young pawn in Gyoku-ou's hands to whip up an armed mob to hunt Rikuson down - and his mother and sister give their lives to ensure his survival - not for vengeance, but so that the Yi Clan's mission of protecting the west will live on even if the named clan itself dies. So, like Jinshi, he is dedicated to the welfare of the people above all else.

The trouble with relying on an unruly mob is that it's sloppy. Gyoku-ou left multiple survivors and they have absolutely no love for him. He's left weapons at his back.

Rikuson is the other person Gyoku-ou utterly fails to read. He spends well over a year back in his homeland, working for Gyoku-ou as an aide ostensibly from the central region, patiently waiting for an opening - even as Gyoku-ou, who knows that Rikuson has to be assigned to the west with some kind of ulterior motive, is so blind that he thinks he must be a secret member of the La Clan, rather than the Yi boy he tried to kill seventeen years earlier.

Rikuson represents the culmination Gyoku-ou's short term thinking in that he doesn't bother to think about the threat of any surviving Yi clan might pose to him.

He will not insult his mother's memory, or his sister's. But if his mission of protecting the west coincides with vengeance for his family? Sure enough, Gyoku-ou's insistence on going to war (and dragging the Imperial family's legitimacy into his motivations) gives Rikuson his opening; especially because he isn't a vigilante.

He is acting under orders.

The New You

Rikuson's point about Gyoku-ou's life being a tragedy hits home when you consider Gyokuyou's thoughts of how she knows her father loves her - but would also abandon her in a heartbeat if she is no longer valuable to him. Unlike her older brother, she has a very clear-eyed view of how their father operates and focuses on making sure that her value never drops in his eyes.

Gyoku-ou's value to Gyoku'en plummeted the day he destroyed the Yi Clan - Gyoku'en's family. He was given a second chance to show that he could still perform the single function of the men of the Yi Clan - to protect the west. When he endangered it instead, Gyoku'en sent the weapon he'd spent seventeen years preparing (Rikuson) with an execution order.

By first destroying the Yi Clan and then following it up with a proposed invasion of Shaoh, Gyoku-ou proved to Gyoku'en that he was no son of his. Given how desperate he was to be his father's son, this whole book is a tragedy in the classic sense. The Jade Nightingale was so desperate to reinvent himself as a Jade Eagle that he destroyed himself in pursuit of the one thing he never lost - his father's love. But, to be his father's heir, what he needed was Gyoku'en's trust and respect, not his love.

And he killed that seventeen years ago along with the Yi Clan.

Ironically, the foreign born girl that he despised and attempted to undermine at every opportunity, emerges as their father's true heir and mother of the nation, with the rest of the surviving Yi clan as part of her loyal retinue.

In her triumph, the Yi Clan is reborn as the You Clan as Gyoku'en, a Yi man, is given a clan name on the strength of Gyokuyou's role as Empress. So much of their history has been lost, down to the matrilineal succession and family records, but their mission lives on through the Yi men who will continue to protect the west, no matter the personal cost to themselves. There is no room for self-absorption here, therefore Gyoku-ou has no place in their new clan.

Also, a parallel to pay attention to is how the destruction of the Yi Clan and the Shi Clan are mirroring each other with the children being saved. The Yi Clan is reborn with a new name, which leads one to wonder what the consequences of saving those Shi children will be long term.

A Dagger In The Dark

Gyoku-ou sucks up a lot of air in Vol. 11 because he is driving the action - Jinshi, Maomao and their party are all stuck reacting to him, except for one character; Chue.

We see Chue attach herself to Maomao starting with the ship and it's not difficult to guess that just as Lihaku is serving as a discreet bodyguard for Maomao on Jinshi's orders, Chue is also there as protection. Chue doesn't try to conceal that she is clearly trained in espionage either.

Rikuson's proposal to Maomao is not a serious bid for her hand, but nor is it a joke - it's a message to Chue that Jinshi needs to tighten security around Maomao. As he puts it, he knows the "hyper protective" elements around her will close ranks. Because he's foreseen a strategy that may not have yet occurred to Gyoku-ou (who tends not to pay attention to the bit parts of the play), but if it does would almost certainly push the country into war.

Maomao is the lever that could move both Lakan and Jinshi.

All he has to do is kill her and make it look like a foreign attack. Lakan's instinctive ability to read a situation and Jinshi's formidable investigative skills would likely be dulled in the face of their rage and grief. Especially since they are technically Gyoku-ou's guests and don't have freedom of movement to push the issue.

Rikuson seizes his opportunity before Gyoku-ou can continue to escalate, but he realizes quickly that Chue arranged the stage and was there as both spy and backup assassin. (I think it's safe to say that Gyoku-ou's conspiracy theory AND that Yi family ledger will be reported, given that we know there were ladies-in-waiting at the meeting and that's how Chue was disguised - and she didn't actually promise to dispose of it).

Gyoku-ou doesn't bother to think that while the Emperor may be far away and the Imperial Brother is a manageable threat, that the people surrounding Jinshi may not be bound by his strictures. Hence, Chue was on standby. No matter what, Gyoku-ou was never going to make it to that ritual. He was never smart enough to realize that his crossing the line would be never be forgiven.

While Jinshi would order an execution if necessary (and has in the past), he would never order an assassination. Therefore, it's evident that Chue reports to someone else. Who that someone is, we don't know, but there's only one person further up the Imperial tree than Jinshi, so it would be reasonable for Rikuson to assume that the Emperor has placed additional protection around not just Jinshi, but Maomao.

Exclusive: Baby Swap!

Jinshi's birth is not a secret to the audience and while Maomao doesn't have confirmation, she's pretty certain of her suspicion. This volume made it patently obvious that there are others out there who are perfectly capable of putting the pieces together, even if the details are twisted.

Let's return to Gyoku-ou's conspiracy theory.

He's put together all the correct pieces. The Emperor's attitude toward Jinshi makes no sense in a traditional palace setting - a much younger, handsome, charismatic and competent brother? That's a threat to the Emperor and his direct line. But Jinshi is never treated that way - instead he's indulged on many fronts.

He's allowed to duck most of his official duties as Ka Zuigetsu (except for a few he can't, where he appears masked).

He's allowed to pretend to be a eunuch for six years and run the Rear Palace.

When he finally reveals himself to the court to put down the Shi Rebellion, he's described as "hale" and "just as proficient in the military arts as the administrative." (More proof that Jinshi is NOT the best judge of his own abilities). He emerges fully formed into court politics - a perfectly trained Crown Prince - only to have a newborn given the title instead.

Gyoku-ou deliberately put the worst possible spin on these facts. I suspect the rest of the You siblings are going to keep their mouths shut about Gyoku-ou's ugly theory, but if he could think of it, if Maomao could think of it with just seeing Jinshi standing next to Lady Ah-Duo, then so can others.

Maomao can be mad about Jinshi branding himself all she wants, but it's currently looking like an absolutely BRILLIANT move on Jinshi's part. Whatever doubts Gyoku-ou managed to plant about Jinshi and the Emperor's motives with the rest of the You clan siblings, Empress Gyokuyou is not likely to entertain it.

Also, it got the Emperor to essentially "banish" Jinshi to the edges of the Empire shortly after his new Crown Prince was born, which makes it look to other members of the court like the Emperor is taking steps to rein in his younger brother and balances the factions that have to be forming back in the capital.

This is not a secret that can be kept forever. No matter how careful Ah-Duo and Anshi were, the information is starting to leak out around the edges, as we see that the Empress' ladies in waiting that were dismissed clearly had eyes and ears - and in at least one case, a loose tongue.

The next arc is being seeded and Jinshi is inching closer and closer to that throne. He ran the Rear Palace for years (essentially managing the nation in microcosm) and as of the end of Vol. 11, he's now stepping up to govern a province and gain actual ruling experience while also having suppressed a war.

I've said before that Jinshi ascending the throne is the bad ending - if there is a single person who is more trapped by the palace than the prince, it's the emperor. We'll see what happens!

[fidjiefidjie]

Bon Soir 🆕️ 🎧 🚔💙

Dombrance 🎶 Double Trouble (Bayrou+Copé)

[actu-alite]

[contentpassstory]

Sword Fighters Simulator Vulcanus Maximus Jeu-Bayrou

Sword Fighters Simulator Vulcanus Maximus Jeu-Bayrou" appears to be a captivating title for a sword fighting simulation game. In English, it translates to "Sword Fighters Simulator Vulcanus Maximus Game-Bayrou." Let's delve into what this game might entail:

Introduction: Welcome to "Sword Fighters Simulator Vulcanus Maximus," where players are transported to the epic world of sword fighting prowess and medieval combat. In this thrilling simulation game, you'll step into the shoes of a skilled swordsman, honing your abilities, mastering various weapons, and battling formidable foes to become the ultimate champion of Jeu-Bayrou.

Gameplay Features:

Storyline: Set in the mythical realm of Jeu-Bayrou, the game follows the journey of a young swordsman determined to prove his worth in the legendary Vulcanus Maximus tournament. As you progress through the ranks, you'll encounter rival warriors, uncover ancient mysteries, and ultimately face off against the formidable champions of Jeu-Bayrou in a battle for glory and honor.

Conclusion: "Sword Fighters Simulator Vulcanus Maximus Jeu-Bayrou" offers an exhilarating gaming experience for fans of sword fighting and medieval combat. With its immersive gameplay, stunning visuals, and captivating storyline, this game transports players to a world where bravery is rewarded, skill is paramount, and victory awaits those bold enough to seize it.

Are you ready to embark on the ultimate sword fighting adventure? Join the battle and prove your mettle in "Sword Fighters Simulator Vulcanus Maximus Jeu-Bayrou" today!

[dixvinsblog]

Coups de gueule - l'actu de la semaine par Pierre Thevenin ( février 2024)

Les agriculteurs, l’école, les classes moyennes, la santé, les finances publiques, le pouvoir d’achat… (catalogue non exhaustif établi par « Le Canard » : Qui pourrait dire à Attal que trop de priorités risquent de tuer la priorité ? À l’heure où l’AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) fait des siennes en proposant de renvoyer des Allemands d’origine étrangère, vient de sortir « La zone d’intérêt »,…

[observatoiredumensonge]

Remaniement : Macronie, un canard sans queue ni tête

Juste un mois que Gabriel Attal est Premier ministre et l’effet « waouh » est en train de faire « pschitt ». Par Georges Michel Nous avons besoin de votre soutien pour poursuivre notre combat face à la dictature qui s’en vient.Cliquer ICI Remaniement : Macronie, un canard sans queue ni tête [EDITO] Avant-hier, la chose semblait quasiment acquise. Eh bien, non, François Bayrou ne pilotera pas…

[stpauldevarces2026]

François Bayrou et le procès sur un sujet de fond : la politisation progressive des collaborateurs de collectivités payés sur des fonds publics : depuis lundi, à Paris, le procès du Modem et de François Bayrou est ouvert. La question de fond : le contenu du travail de collaborateurs payés sur fonds publics. C'est un sujet important pour trois raisons : 1) dans quelle mesure des juges peuvent-ils s'immiscer dans l'appréciation du contenu du travail de collaborateurs d'élus ? Pendant longtemps, une frontière existait pour considérer que ce domaine là ne pouvait être exploré. Cette barrière a sauté. 2) Puisque cette barrière a sauté, dans ce contenu, où est la séparation entre un travail pour la collectivité et un travail pour le parti politique ou pour un leader politique ? La définition de ce nouveau périmètre sera très intéressante. 3) Quelles autres situations en dehors du Modem ? Quand l'institution judiciaire sortira-t-elle de la culture de l'exemple pour frapper identiquement toutes les situations analogues sans la moindre exception ? Ce dernier volet est lui aussi un réel sujet de fond. Comment est-il possible de

purger un problème grave en ne traitant qu'un ou deux exemples ? La question est essentielle : la politisation des personnels des collectivités publiques. Au début de la décentralisation, les passerelles avec des fonctionnaires d'Etat devaient contribuer à renforcer un pouvoir d'expertise tout en respectant l'impartialité partisane. Cette étape est passée. Désormais, les filières locales sont des carrières aussi intéressantes que des carrières d'Etat, voire parfois davantage, et les collaborateurs deviennent souvent d'abord attachés aux décideurs du moment plutôt qu'à la collectivité comme Institution. Une nouvelle donne majeure.

19/10/2023

[francaistoutsimplement]

Liste des condamnés et mises en examen dans la macronie:

Laetitia Avia - ex députée et porte parole LREM condamnée à six mois de prison avec sursis et deux ans d’inéligibilité pour harcèlement moral.

Anne-Christine Lang - ex députée condamnée à 3 ans d’inéligibilité et 60 000€ d’amende pour détournement de fonds publics.

François Pupponi - condamné à 5000 euros d’amende et 29 000 euros de dommages et intérêts, en janvier 2022, pour abus de biens sociaux et faux et usage de faux.

Alain Griset - ex ministre délégué condamné à six mois de prison avec sursis et trois ans d’inéligibilité avec sursis pour déclaration incomplète de son patrimoine

Sira Sylla - ex députée LREM condamnée pour harcèlement moral, non-paiement d’heures supplémentaires et de journées de repos.

Jacques Krabal - ex député LREM condamné pour travail dissimulé et harcèlement moral de son ancien directeur de cabinet.

Pierre Cabaré - ex député LREM condamné pour licenciement sans cause réelle et sérieuse d’un collaborateur. Egalement poursuivi pour harcèlement sexuel et moral et agression sexuel par sa suppléante et assistante parlementaire.

Sandrine Josso - condamnée à un an d’inéligibilité pour n’avoir pas présenté ses comptes de campagne de l’élection municipale dans les temps. Également poursuivi pour abus de confiance pour avoir demandé à son assistante de lui prêter 10 000 euros en contractant un crédit à la consommation qu’elle ne veut pas rembourser.

Benoit Simian - condamné à huit mois de prison avec sursis pour harcèlement moral sur son ex conjointe. Également poursuivi pour harcèlement à l’encontre d’une collaboratrice.

Jean-Paul Delevoye - condamné à 4 mois de prison avec sursis et 15.000 euros d’amende pour ne pas avoir déclaré plusieurs mandats à la Haute autorité pour la transparence de la vie publique.

Stéphanie Kerbarh - condamnée pour un licenciement sans cause réelle et sérieuse de son assistant.

Alexandre Benalla - condamné à 3 ans de prison, dont 1 an ferme pour violences volontaires, immixtion dans l’exercice d’une fonction publique, port public et sans droit d’insignes réglementés, recel de détournement d’images issues d’un système de vidéo-protection et recel de violation du secret professionnel.

Vincent Crase - gendarme réserviste salarié du parti LREM, condamné à 2 ans d’emprisonnement avec sursis, 500 euros d’amende, interdiction de port d’arme de 10 ans et confiscation de celles qui détient pour « violence en réunion », « port d’arme prohibé » et « suppression de données » dans l’affaire des violences du 1er mai 2018 à Paris.

Jérôme Peyrat - condamné pour violences envers son ex-compagne à 3000 euros d’amende avec sursis.

Stéphane Trompille - conseiller de Macron condamné pour « harcèlement sexuel » envers une ex-collaboratrice.

Mustapha Laabid - député LREM condamné à six mois de prison avec sursis, trois ans d’inéligibilité et 10.000 euros d’amende pour abus de confiance.

Claire O’Petit - députée LREM condamnée pour des fautes de gestion.

François Bayrou et Sylvie Goulard - poursuivis pour abus de confiance, recel d’abus de confiance et escroqueries concernant des soupçons d’emplois fictifs d’assistants au Parlement européen.

Alexis Kohler - mis en examen pour prise illégale d’interêts.

Thierry Solère - mis en examen pour « détournement de fonds publics », « trafic d’influence passif » dans le but de faire « obtenir des marchés » à des sociétés immobilières et à une société de conseil, et pour manquements aux obligations déclaratives à la Haute Autorité pour la transparence de la vie publique. »

Éric Dupond-Moretti - mis en examen pour « prise illégale d’intérêts »

Alexandre Nardella - mis en examen pour « complicité de détournement de fonds publics » et « recel de détournement de fonds publics ».

Michel Mercier, ancien ministre de la Justice et trésorier du Modem, mis en examen pour « complicité de détournement de fonds publics ».

Richard Ferrand - mis en examen pour prise illégale d’intérêts.

(Liste partielle .....)

[bourbon-ontherocks]

En ces temps troublés, je me suis amusée à imaginer pour quels partis voteraient les personnages de l'Art du Crime, et je me fais rire toute seule donc voilà, have fun with me.

Florence. Ses parents ont voté Mitterrand en 1981 et c'est une tradition familiale qu'elle perpétue sans exception. Rare électrice du PS encore sur le pont après 2017, elle aime les fleurs et surtout les roses.

Pierre. Comme sa fille, fidèle du Parti Socialiste et réfractaire à l'idée de changement même si idéologiquement il est de droite maintenant. Le saviez-vous ? La famille Chassagne est à l'origine de 30% du score d'Anne Hidalgo en 2022.

Antoine. Pas de parti attitré, Antoine il vote utile, c'est sa vocation. Il fait barrage où on lui dit, la dernière fois qu'il a voté pour un parti auquel il s'identifiait vraiment, c'était en 2002 (il avait voté Besancenot au nom de l'Internationale de la babyface).

Alex. Très envie de lui faire voter Renaissance parce que "en même temps" et "quoi qu'il en coûte" sont un peu ses deuxième et troisième prénoms, mais en vrai, Alex, il vote plutôt écolo. Il sait ce que c'est de voir arriver les catastrophes avant tout le monde et d'être la voix de la raison que personne n'écoute. Et puis toutes ces capsules de café au bureau, là, niveau d��veloppement durable c'est pas top.

Adèle. Parti Communiste Français. Elle distribue de la merch à l'effigie de Fabien Roussel en festivals. D'autres questions ?

Hugo. Le parti d'Edouard Philippe que personne connaît, là, Horizon, parce que c'est un peu les hipsters de la macronie.

Juliette en saison 4. MoDem, parce qu'elle a une tête à avoir un oncle qui connaît personnellement François Bayrou.

Juliette en saison 7. Parti animaliste.

La psy de Florence. A émigré et s'abstient (de tout signe de vie) depuis la circonscription des Français de l'étranger.

Le psy de Florence. Agent du chaos qui ne peut que voter LFI.

Nathalie. Probablement RN pour pouvoir retourner à Moscou, mais personne n'a jamais osé lui poser la question.

Varane. Reconquête parce que je l'aime pas 🤣

Nathalie Vallon. Est décédée. Est donc tout à fait qualifiée pour voter LR.

[randomnameless]

What are your top 5 Strawmitri arguments?

Mine would be, in no particular order:

Dimitri cares about the present, therefore he doesn't care at all about the future and would be a terrible leader because of it

He's so mentally ill he can never hope to recover, and as such Edelgard did him a favor by killing him in CF

He's more at fault for the war than Edelgard because he fought back after she attacked first and unprovoked, instead of letting her take Faerghus without a fight

The entire point of Dimitri's character and of AM in general is how royalty can get away with commiting crimes commoners would be executed for, since Fleche gets killed for trying to take revenge on him but he survives in spite of all the people he killed when he was at his most unhinged

Dimitri's hatred of Edelgard is rooted in his love for her back when they were kids, which is why him killing her in AM by stabbing her with his phallic-shaped lance is supposed to be symbolic of his desire to fuck her

Oh gods, I remember I wanted to make a "redshit takes awards" once upon a time, but then I gave up lol

I haven't browsed that much about Dimitri nor given too much thought about the discourse surrounding him because laughing at the Rhea takes took way too much time, but I think I really laughed at the :

Dimitri is racist because he cuts Claude when Claude is being an asshole about the Abyss

Even if I can't forgot the

Defensive invasion

Dimitri represents toxic masculinity (the guy who has traditional "feminine" coded hobbies like sewing, who cries, who blushes calling his friends by their first names, whose biggest default and the one that leads him to his downfall is his empathy, etc etc)

Dimitri stole Felix and Annette's dads :(

dimitri is a religious extremist because he shelters Rhea who is also a religious extremist. source : trust me bro I know i have a degree in advanced bullshit

the State of Quo - as Dimitri reforms his country like his dad wanted to do but never got the chance because his head rolled from his shoulders for some reason - this one was parroted in Nopes because how dare he want a progressive change rather than a radical one !!

and last but not the least, and it's less about Dimitri than about the poor redshiter who said something like "women love dimitri because they are controled by their ovaries and they prefer a violent man who would abuse them rather than real people like me :("

Oh and also, as a french person so far removed from american politics, the "Dimitri is a centrist" take always made me laugh (Dimitri chez Bayrou?)

From your takes though, I'd rank them like this :

peepee weapon thus stabbing Supreme Leader means he wanted to fuck her and this is why he goes "cray-cray" because she didn't reciprocate his affections (and totes not because he believes she killed his father, their mother, his friends and actually starts a war slaughtering thousands of randoms)

"too cray-cray to live"

caring about the present sucks because you don't care about the future (which is totally not built on the people living in the present!)

nobles bad because they kill commoners who try to kill them :(

victim blaming (this one is so mainstream!)

[emilelovesbohort]

I don’t really think non French people get how deep in shit we are currently.

When we were watching Macron’s speech I went to the toilets (logically) but I was startled one minute later by my mother’s cry : what the President did was absolutely unpredictable and the stupidest crap my 63 years old mom had ever seen.

And right after that we had an interview of minister Rachida Dati and ex-minister Francois Bayrou rambling about how brave Macron was for making this decision.

Now you have to understand : Le Rassemblement National had a total of 31,5 percent of the votes but,also, Reconquête !(another far right movement) had 5,5. And they will most certainly unite for the « législatives ». So 37 percent of the vote for the RN. And 48 percent of France did not vote for the Europeans elections, so probably even more votes for the proto-fascists ! Hahahahaha (shoot me)

Literally our only hope for the left is in Melenchon, a 72 years old yelling living meme.

[stephy-le-clubeur]

In the French TV series Les hommes de l'ombre, several plot points resembled real life.

The PM is secretly homosexual but refuses to disclose it to protect his lover

The presidential candidate is a mistress and a cheater, but is campaigned as 'true love'

The president marries a teacher

The presidential campaign is named 'Ensemble'

The show is about an ex counsellor of the president campaigning for a snap election

Interestingly, this show was aired in 2012, and its screenwriter, Régis Lefèbvre, has reportedly known Stephane "since the presidential campaign" and was in charge of the 2019 European Campaign as deputy campaign director...

A display of how fiction shines into reality!

https://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/le-scan/coulisses/2019/02/01/25006-20190201ARTFIG00168-europeennes-bayrou-choisit-un-proche-pour-co-diriger-la-campagne-de-la-majorite.php

Oh so fiction and reality fused together. French politics seems very dramatic so it makes sense that fiction and reality would have some common points.

[forestduck]

Feb 11, 2021 - À Combloux, le constructeur Chalets Bayrou imagine un chalet familial hors du temps, avec une vue épousto...

[head-post]

Le Pen to clash with Macron on Ukraine, defence issues

No matter how unfortunate the upcoming snap parliamentary elections turn out for Emmanuel Macron, he has always had to take comfort in the fact that he will remain president until 2027 – with all the sacrosanct foreign policy and military powers that entails, POLITICO reports.

However, his right-wing opponent Marine Le Pen is signalling that if her National Rally party wins the prime minister’s post, she will not be content to let Macron set the country’s strategic course through the presidential prerogative, which traditionally covers hot topics such as Ukraine, defence, diplomacy and the choice of EU commissioner.

This struggle for core powers is sparking fierce debate within France and terrifying France’s EU and NATO partners as the 68-million-strong nuclear-armed country looks set for a period of instability. Assumptions from the US to the Indo-Pacific that the president’s powers will simply be unchecked on the international stage after the election may prove unfounded.

France has experienced periods of co-rule before – when the president and prime minister belonged to different parties – but it was always a fairly straightforward co-operation between parties with similar worldviews. This time, a right-wing prime minister – perhaps Jordan Bardella of the Rassemblement Nationale, ahead in the polls – will blow up the political order.

On Wednesday, Le Pen gave the clearest indication yet that she intends to snatch any shred of power she can from Macron if her party wins a strong enough majority in parliamentary elections.

In explosive remarks, Le Pen dismissed the title of France’s commander-in-chief as an “honourable title” and said the real power, particularly over the budget, lies with the prime minister’s government. Le Pen told daily Le Télégramme:

“Jordan [Bardella] has no intention of picking a quarrel with Macron, but he has set red lines. On Ukraine, the president will not be able to send troops.” 

Macron said earlier this month he was “finalising” plans to send military trainers to Ukraine, and tensions with Russia are likely to take centre stage in the debate over France’s strategic direction.

Macron pushing for Thierry Breton

Ahead of the first round of voting on Sunday, Le Pen is also raising the stakes on EU policy after her party challenged Macron’s right to appoint France’s next European commissioner, a role traditionally seen as a gift from the president.

The European commissioner is a hugely important role for France, and Macron wants his candidate to be given a large economic portfolio that would allow Paris to put its priorities – such as strengthening European industrial champions – at the top of the EU agenda.

According to five officials, Macron is pushing for Thierry Breton, who has promoted Macron’s vision for defence and industry, to continue as French commissioner.

Bardella, however, insists it will be his government that will choose France’s commissioner in Brussels, saying this week that the appointment will be one of the “first decisions” they will make.

If the Rassemblement Nationale does not win enough seats to form a government, it will still be the largest group in parliament and will be well placed to reject government laws it does not like.

Strong constitution

On Thursday, Macron’s allies invoked legendary World War II leader Charles de Gaulle, former president and founder of the Fifth Republic, to hit back at Le Pen.

Armed Forces Minister Sébastien Lecornu said “the constitution is not ceremonious” and quoted de Gaulle as saying the president was “responsible for France” and “responsible for the Republic.” François Bayrou, leader of the French centrist party MoDem, allied to Macron, said:

“You are profoundly challenging the Constitution.”

Naturally, the devil is in the details. According to the French constitution, the president is the head of the armed forces and in charge of French foreign policy, while the prime minister runs the government and thus domestic policy. But a closer look at the division of powers between the president and the prime minister turns out to be a much more complicated picture. The budget, as Le Pen pointed out, is indeed the most important leverage over many policy areas in the National Assembly. Eric Landot, public law specialist, said:

“It’s super complicated, there is no clear boundary. The president is the chief of the armed forces, but Article 21 says the prime minister is responsible for national defence.”

According to Landot, Le Pen is wrong when she says the president’s role is only “ceremonial” – but there are many ways the prime minister can clip the president’s wings. He also said:

“If the president wanted to send soldiers to Ukraine on support missions, a government that disagrees with that policy, could block the government decrees and say: ‘No, I’m not signing that. The constitutional ambiguity would block decision-making.”

Read more HERE

[dixvinsblog]

On veut des noms – Jean-Paul Clair  (B)

Patronymes en B BAYROU François né en 1951 : On ne peut pas dire qu’il ait fait des promesses démesurées en déclarant : « Nous sommes en mesure de faire tout ce que nous pouvons faire ». A son sujet Nicolas Sarkozy a déclaré « Pour désespérer de François Bayrou, encore faudrait-il que j’aie eu un jour de l’espoir en lui. » BAZARD Armand (1791-1832) : Il alla au charbon sans y mettre le bazar.…

[claudehenrion]

La partition Droite / Gauche : une utopie ou une dystopie ?

  Il ne faut jamais oublier que la principale raison pour laquelle 24,01 % des français ont voté pour Macron en mai 2017 --avant que 66 % ne votent contre Marine lePen au second tour, a été que notre jeune Mozart de la gestion de crises (à ceci près que c'est lui qui fabrique les-dites ''crises'' pour les commenter sans jamais les résoudre !) avait réussi à faire croire à un tout petit quart des électeurs qu'il avait trouvé, lui, le ''Sésame-ouvre-toi'' du bonheur sur la Terre : ''la séparation ’‘Gauche / Droite” n'existe pas !''. Cette pathologie tri-centenaire frappe des politiciens qui croient que ratisser large les fera élire : le mythe “ni...ni...” refait alors surface, le temps d'une campagne.

Les appellations “Droite” et “Gauche” ne doivent leur nom qu'à un événement mineur : le 28 juillet 1789, se disputant sur les poids relatifs de l'autorité royale et du pouvoir de l'assemblée populaire dans la future Constitution, les constituants se séparèrent en deux groupes. Les partisans du veto royal se mirent à la droite du président de l’Assemblée, et les opposants à ce veto se groupèrent à sa gauche. Et c'est à ce hasard que nous devons les errances lévogyres des Bayrou, des Darmanin, des Le Maire, ou d'autres, dans les palais officiels notre république.

La permanence d'une perception “de droite” et d'une vision“de gauche” (les américains disent, joliment : les “pros” et les “cons” !) se retrouve dans tous les pays, ce qui s'explique : la structure “bi-lobaire” du cerveau humain n'a aucun mal à percevoir l'existence de fait d'une différenciation entre pour et contre, entre nous et vous ou “moi” et “eux��, entre les uns et les autres, voire entre raison et passion, ou que sais-je, encore ! Si les mots Gauche et Droite sont assez récents dans ce sens, cette dichotomie est très ancrée dans notre humanité.

On la trouve dès 350 av. JC, dans “l'ordre naturel des choses”  d'Aristote (Ethique à Nicomaque) : l'individu n'a eu besoin d'inventer un gouvernement que pour protéger sa vie, sa liberté et ses biens, et le pouvoir politique ne saurait donc disposer des individus ou de leurs biens : il est –ou devrait être-- à leur service… Une si belle réflexion, qui serait qualifiée “de Droite” de nos jours, a été contrée par Hobbes (in– le Leviathan-1621) puis par Rousseau (le Contrat social -1762) sous le nom d’un ordre contractuel qui voudrait appliquer à tous les domaines des raisonnements de type économique, ce qui a engendré un culte de l'Etat --devenu, par la suite, une iso-religion sectaire. Mais contrairement à ce que nos ''malfaisants'' tentent de faire croire depuis 2 siècles, l'existence d'une Gauche et d'une Droite n'a rien à voir avec le “combat du bien contre le mal” que Sartre évoquait dans ma jeunesse (Nous allions l'écouter dans les arrière-salles enfumées du Saint Germain des Prés des années 1950, sans tout comprendre -et pour cause--… Que de temps perdu !).

C'est à la fin du XIX ème siècle que la séparation entre Gauche et Droite a débordé sur le terrain des valeurs et des idées. (NDLR : certains voient là une conséquence de l'affaire Dreyfus, qui divisa notre pays comme l’a fait l'opposition entre Pétain et de Gaulle... ou, mutatis mutandis, le passage en force –ce que même Macron a reconnu, dans un de ses rares accès de lucidité– de cette loi “Taubira” qui a confirmé l'échec XXL du quinquennat hollandais). La Gauche (qui n'est que le fruit blet de montages intellectuels) a réussi a faire croire un temps qu'il existerait aussi une ''théorie de la Droite''... ce qui n'a jamais été le cas : personne ne peut citer une ''doctrine dite de Droite'' qui soit comparable aux élucubrations venant de la Gauche –qui sont, en plus, les seules explications à son existence.

En allant au bout de ce raisonnement –inattaquable dans son essence comme dans son existence (pour montrer qu'il me reste un micro-souvenir des conneries de Sartre) mais rigoureusement interdit depuis 1968– on peut dire que tout groupe humain identifiable (famille, tribu, horde, clan, association, etc...) évolue suivant des ''errements'' que comprend la nature, et finit par en arriver, spontanément, à des structures comparables à ce que les théoriciens de Gauche désignent comme ''la Droite'' Que ce soit bien ou mal est un autre sujet sur lequel je suis prêt à donner mon avis, ''sur simple demande'' !

A l'arrivée (quelle qu'elle soit), cette opposition entre ''une évolution logique pratiquement incontournable'' et un artefact (= Structure d'origine artificielle qui altère un phénomène naturel) érigé en ''système''... se traduit, sur le terrain, par deux conceptions du monde : la Gauche défend pêle-mêle l'égalité (dévoyée jusqu'à l'égalitarisme inégal à la mode)... un ‘’progrès social’’ que l'on peut interpréter comme ''ce que je crois susceptible de m'amener des voix dans les urnes''... une laïcité qui a glissé vers un refus doctrinaire de Dieu (d'où le comique involontaire de l'expression ''chrétien de gauche'')... et par la prééminence absolue de l'Etat… alors que la droite, convaincue qu'il faut qu'elle ait une théorie pour devenir comparable à la Gauche, met en avant (et en vrac) liberté, ordre, nation, tradition et famille…. Et si toutes deux évoquent la Fraternité, c'est collectivement réglementée à gauche et individuellement exercée à droite.        

Autour de l'Ordre invoqué à Droite  (“il faut sauver le monde tel qu’il est”), et du Changement, à Gauche  (“on est dans le monde pour le transformer”), cette dualité théorique va devenir : une droite dite “conservatrice” qui se voit réaliste (tenir est mieux que courir)… une gauche qui pense que changement = progrès (progressiste ou utopiste ?)... puis une extrême-droite plutôt réactionnaire, qui pense que “c’était mieux avant''... et une extrême gauche qui se dit révolutionnaire mais qui est surtout dystopique. Et les adeptes du ‘’ni droite, ni gauche’’, qui n'a jamais débouché sur rien, n’y changeront rien : leur “ni-ni” est en vérité un “non-non”. Eux se rêvent “au centre”, sauf Bayrou, le nul qui veut les pousser à la place qui est la sienne : à gauche ! Les autres, après s'être fourvoyés un instant trop long, les rêvent ''enfin dehors, arrêtant de nuire''.

Ephémérement porté par le simplisme de cette non-idée et par la complicité coupable d'une Presse ringarde qui adore le faux-dieu “Changement”, le retour macronien du “ni droite, ni gauche” a voulu convaincre des esprits malléables ou gentils à en être naïfs, que la structure binaire du monde appartiendrait au passé et que le temps du cerveau bi-lobaire ayant structuré un monde binaire et bipolaire (qui fonctionne, honnêtement, pas si mal que ça !) était ringard : deux pôles, deux états, deux sexes, l'être et le néant… –et même le bien et le mal, sans compter les beaux fruits des progrès techniques et scientifiques qui avaient le temps d'être “digérés” au lieu d'être “forcés” comme on voudrait le faire maintenant… tout cela serait, d'après cette thèse sans épaisseur, démodé ? “Ils” l'affirment très fort, mais on n'est pas obligé d'adhérer à de telles sornettes !

Les grandes manœuvres des jours passés cherchent à nous égarer encore plus : celui qui nous a imposé pendant 7 ans tout ce contre quoi nous nous débattions avec l'énergie du désespoir, le ''méchant'', donc, se présente sous les traits de ce qu'il croit être un gentil –en réalité son clone ou peu s'en faut. ''Je suis oiseau, voyez mes ailes'', dit la chauve-souris, avant d'affirmer, les temps ayant changé : ''Qui fait l'oiseau ? C'est le plumage. Je suis Souris''. Et la Fontaine de conclure, avec 356 ans d'avance sur la conférence de presse de ce soir, 16 janvier 2024, que... plusieurs ont évité, en changeant d'écharpe, des dangers attendus. L'équation est simple : sept ans de liberté malfaisante pour deux ans de normalité apparente... et le tour est joué !

Le ''mini-Macron'' nouveau va nous servir, ''H 24'', un brouet pâlichon, soi disant ''de Droite'' : des discours sans action sur l'immigration. Mais le prix à payer sera énorme : une GPA ''éthique'' (volapük signé Attal, donc jamais défini), l'assassinat légal des vieux et des malades, l'IVG dans la Constitution, et autres drames-à-venir : on sait depuis hollande qu'un gouvernement de Gauche qui se rend compte qu'il ne maîtrise plus rien et qu'il est impuissant et (ou : parce que) sec, se réfugie dans le changement pour le changement en matière prétendue ''sociétale''. Et là, l'apport de la Droite ne peut être que dans une opposition frontale. On aurait lâché la proie pour l'ombre... que je ne serais pas surpris : ''Je suis oiseau... vive les rats !''

H-Cl.