Hulot, Minister at 100 Liters on time?

[Ahmed]

Christophe, you write:

Who among Hulot's critics has met or known him personally?

Warning! My critical position in no way targets the person! I do not doubt its many qualities, but it is necessary to go beyond this too close observation stage to analyze the situation in ideological terms: what game can it play in the current challenges facing the implacable underlying determinisms? That's the right question and everything else is just (bad) literature ...

Wait for the rest and you will quickly understand what I mean

[Christophe]

His relative integrity and his "deep" convictions will certainly (I hope at least) make things happen more in the right direction than his predecessors ...

Otherwise we can talk about the Ségolène solar route scam If you want??

ps: I added a "?" in the title ... history that this subject remains a debate and not a firm position!

[Ahmed]

"His relative integrity", no more than his "deep" convictions, will unfortunately change nothing! At the most, we can expect that he does not launch projects as hubuesque as those of Ms. Royal (but what would she not have done to be talked about?).

[Christophe]

Well, is that right already?

I continue to believe and think that it is much less worse than its predecessors ... obviously it will not save the climate by itself (although ... if it grants research credits to good researchers we could have good surprises ...)

[chatelot16]

it is precisely its strength! he needs nothing to be talked about! his notoriety is already made ... and if he has succeeded what he has already done is that he is more competent than segolene, or that he knows how to surround himself with those who know, which is a quality even bigger

we come out of having a president who not only was not very good but also got angry with all those who were better than him ... result he found himself alone and unable to continue

[Christophe]

Is that so? Was Flamby angry?

[1360]

I think Hulot has the ideas and the ability to do good things. Unfortunately, politics is much more difficult than crossing virgins with a convoy of overpowered 8x8 trucks. I hope it will have enough room to maneuver to make things happen.

To be continued...

[Did67]

Eternal debate about "entryism" (which I mentioned recently, about myself, but I no longer know where):

- is it better to stay away from the "system", with pure ideas (or, alternatively, realize your "pure ideas" alone in your tipi and your corner of the forest)? It is not necessarily easier (it is a question of temperament); this makes it possible to be easily critical (sometimes at the cost of pretension), to give lessons, without having to suffer criticism. But on the big night, what will we have done ???

- or is it better to "compromise" in the "system", to get your hands dirty? Of what we could do ideal, pure, in absolute solitude, we will only do 5%, or only 10% or 1% ... because we have to deal with others, with the system, agitated by contradictory forces. But isn't it better to change everyone's life by 1, 5 or 10% rather than isolate yourself by being 100% pure butter ???

I always made the second choice. It just takes a hell of a lot of resilience to take disappointment after disappointment - and, once in a while, a quarter of success. Being able to never be completely satisfied with oneself. Maybe I was "masochistic" ???

Hulot, for me, that he creates, with his means (mastery of the media, ability to drain financial means - sponsorship ...) a foundation to "raise awareness", to "give lessons", to "move" policies (his charter) or that he himself gets his hands dirty just to do a little better what a moron a little less aware of the subject would have done, for me, that does not change much!

France will be as "ecological" as its citizens choose to be. To wait for it to become so through a minister is to remain childish. What can change is the framework in which citizens act ... Or rather, do not act much! Not enough.

In short, being an "enterist", I do not criticize Hulot a priori. I want it to have enough resilience, because the government still seems to me very "economically liberal", which seems to me difficult to reconcile with regulation for less waste, less energy, less growth (mining). .

And then I also hope that his "friends" are not too naive and do not think that he is going to work miracles ... And are content with: "it will be just maybe a little less worse than if it had been such another ... ".

The existence of this simple thread shows that it is not obvious!

[perseus]

[...]


France will be as "ecological" as its citizens choose to be. To wait for it to become so through a minister is to remain childish. What can change is the framework in which citizens act ... Or rather, do not act much! Not enough.
[...]!

Ha that I agree with that!

Waiting for a man, whether he was a minister or a president, to resolve ecological issues on his own, which are complex multifactorial and sometimes global in scope, seems curious to say the least.

The posture of the "white knight" who remains behind and immaculate is certainly respectable but sometimes - too - easy.
It also takes courage to "compromise", to go there, to be beaten, to be accused of perverting the cause ...

Certainly, he will have to compromise, but if he manages to make others compromise on certain points, then his action can be positive, that is a collective. The future will tell, but for the moment I would be wary of an overly hasty judgment both in criticism and in bliss.

And what interests me is less a hypothetical single media and symbolic decision which focuses opinion / media, than changing conditions or social / legal framework favoring the action of people who want to change this.

@+

[Ahmed]

Perseus, you write:

... but if he manages to make others compromise on certain points, then his action can be positive, that is a collective.

As much as I agree with the rest of your message, as much this sentence seems to me uncertain: the collective from above would actually imply, on a theoretical level, reciprocal concessions, however this is not how we can assess the situation, but understand the power relations at stake, and which are clearly not in favor of ecology, as you note it with relevance.
We must absolutely not count on positive decisions from above, since they would come up against the reasons for being of the caste of leaders of all stripes. As you also point out, ecology will come from below or will not.