Sovereignism became the number one public enemy
The arrival of Natacha Polony at the head of the weekly Marianne caused a wave of panic among his political opponents ...
In the sometimes purring and agreed landscape of the French media life, the arrival of Natacha Polony at the head of the weekly Marianne is an event of importance. For it certainly, who will not have stolen after a few punctual trips of the desert for mischief, - desert certainly populated with refreshing oases as was for example the recent experience of Polony.tv - but also for all those who, more and more numerous, seek access to non-consensual information, made at once of intelligence, common sense, honesty, convictions and rigor.
It is only to observe who is sorry for this news to understand that it is an excellent one.
Sovereignism, that's the enemy
The embittered, first, who, denouncing for some years what they called the "editocrats", complain jealously - and a little pitifully, it must be said - of these journalists who shadows them, more talented than them, taking risks, embracing wider spectra, not always having their noses plunged on the same ideological or thematic handlebars, not always always tapping on the same nail, in short, offering a broad, free vision and structured. This criticism, which is supposedly professional and methodological, hides what is really driving it: a visceral allergy to any form of thought that is not formatted according to the socially dominant criteria of cultural leftism and politically correct thinking. It does not matter whether his target is Republican Left, soft right or hard or crisp, top or bottom: whoever dares to make an analysis that is not in line with the multicultural, pro-Europeanist and social-democratic liberal vision will be tied to pillory for the crime of "populism on both sides" and delegitimized without any other form of trial.
Natacha Polony, who has built her path partly on the criticism of pedagogy in the educational environment from which she came, and secondly on the sovereignty that she has politically defended, represents with some other current figures of the freedom to think, to inform and to express, in a way, all that can satisfy the expectations of a growing, and even now majority, part of the French public, constituted as everyone knows from "Gauls refractory" and other "lepers" animated by sad passions. On the contrary, it embodies all that the old leftist and globalist moralists and representatives of the old world (which curiously find themselves more and more often in the same bed without even noticing it and while sincerely believing themselves to hate each other) abhor. For this category of individuals, sovereignty is the abomination of abominations, absolute evil, a nauseating resurgence of so much hated nationalism, a highly suspect symptom of identity populism, and it is also what restrains the invisible hand of the market that does not He loves nothing so much as the flow of money, goods, and people reduced to the status of commodities, all frontiers abolished. In this ultra-simplistic dogmatic system, the sovereignist is the new figure of the fascist past of fashion. The sovereignist is not even a political adversary: he is an enemy.
Too much left for some liberals, too right for some leftists, too much woman in an environment full of men, certainly feminist bon-dyed but not really quick to give way to the top when they are their own career, too free to think in an environment that likes nothing so much as well defined categories ...: we understand that the appointment of Natacha Polony rejoice all those who, precisely, are eager for a reflection both relevant and impertinent, in a political landscape where one observes that fundamental tectonic upheavals are in progress and of which one discerns well that it is the look at the European Union and the sovereignty of the peoples which will be the determining element.
Do I have a complosphere head?
The curious diatribe of Bernard Schalscha in the review of Bernard-Henri Lévy, Rules of the Game, Probably the most successful paragon of all that this appointment can arouse jealousy, bitterness, bad faith and mixed ideological eloquence. Animated by a sort of catastrophic fright, our hero of the Social Democracy visibly in peril, does not hesitate to bring Natacha Polony of all sorts of dangers "Anti-democratic" (stated as such from the subtitle of the article), not shrinking from any rude shortcut, going so far as to put on the same foot the indisputable professional who makes him obviously so frightened and the delirious Alain Soral, all in based on the fact that all this small world would belong to the same "sphere" of the reinformers, that is to say who dispute the evidences in the world of information.
What is simpler, then, to disqualify a confrere, than to compare him to a well-known extremist illuminist simply because he is not satisfied with considering what he is given as being true? For the rest, why not go so far as to include Descartes in this "complosphere", he who among the first revoked everything in doubt, not accepting current opinions and obvious information as cash? Descartes and Soral, same fight, and Socrates is a cat, right? Here we are frightened by what the author, obviously in great panic, calls the "Complosphere" (that it is difficult to enunciate without giggling and which one understands that it takes up the torch of the famous fachosphere a little fallen into disuse), visibly seized himself of an acute crisis of the conspiracy which he denounces . Complosphere, fachosphere, Russosphere ...: it appears that this type of detractors has a pronounced taste pronounced for spherical or circular reasonings, which would explain that they end up looping with their obsessions such as tops.
The author does not shrink from any logical contradiction, however, does not hesitate to instil the venom he believes to fight: the new owner of Marianne, rich Czech billionaire, would represent a danger for the sovereignty of the journalism hexagonal, sovereignism also constantly criticized? What, then, would suddenly pose a problem in this acquisition of capital? The fact that the investor is Czech? Proximity with the countries of the East? Sudden crisis of ostophobia? There would be, it is understood, good foreign investors, and bad, a Ukrainian poutinophobe for example would it be more frequent? In this curious conceptual diaspora, the Russians, the Czechs, would not, it seems, not in the odor of sanctity ... One ends up even wondering if Natacha Polony does not carry in its name even the poison dear to the spies from the cold, the famous polonium, otherwise she was called Natasha Novitchok, which would have been more clear about her true intentions.
In short, all this salmigondis frightening in terms of argumentation but in which we understand that the enemy is free information (or re-information), it is confirmed confirmed in the belief that this arrival of a woman of quality, free-thinking and sovereignist to embody the Republican line of Marianne is an event that is both coherent, intellectually pleasing, and encouraging with regard to the tilting movement currently taking place in the reconfiguration of the French and European ideological power struggles.
by Anne-Sophie Chazaud