In an article published in The world From February 15, Thomas Piketty writes: “Rather than devoting his resources to endless escalation – Trump now demands military budgets reaching 5 % of GDP – Europe must establish its influence on law and justice. With sanctions targeted financial and really applied on a few thousand leaders, it is possible to be heard more effectively than to pilting tank in hangars. fiscal and climatic from southern. […]. “
From ancient tradition, bleating pacifism is a fairly widespread disease in the French left. We therefore have the right not to be surprised to read these nonsense proferified when Europe finally dismisses on the extent of threats at its borders. So let’s leave this – without forgetting to enraged it before such a sabotage of the defense spirit – and let’s approach this monument by another face in order to better observe what also reveals frequent pathologies within the so -called “committed” university community “.
Starting with the contradiction that there is, for a scientist, to handle the yaka like others the mass. Yaka, therefore, hit the leaders in the portfolio to guarantee peace in the world and the progress of law. As if it had already worked somewhere (in Russia? In Iran?), And especially as if a teacher of economics could seriously affirm this kind of thing without initiating the slightest demonstration or giving a single example. Since our author is in his garden – the economy is always a question of money – and that he claims to have discovered Martingale, he should have edifying things to say in this regard, just to convince us. But no, it is much more beautiful when it is harmful.
Veniel sin, moreover, to which I succumb myself from time to time. Since we pretend, we, draw from our university titles a particular legitimacy to take the pen, we cannot hate the idea that our readers make us trust, nor give up easily to abuse their credit. The case is therefore degrees more than in principle. A bit like decency.
The image of an unnecessary pile of tanks is much more serious. The defense effort desired by those who are trying to promote it today is calibrated from top to bottom by the analysis of our critical vulnerabilities. It is acquired – of certain military science – that France lacks properly vital assets: ammunition, anti -missile control tools, planes, drones, ships, infantry staff, new means of Military and electronic warfare … The investments to consent are first of all those who calibrate the ability of our armies to protect the territory beyond a few weeks of combat. Nothing more, nothing less.
The fact is however that Piketty, from the top of his academic condition, in substance in substance to believe, since it is he who says it: 1) that there will be no war on the western European soil; 2) that there is no need to prepare it; 3) that it is much better to put money elsewhere and preferably where he judges him “socially” relevant.
The worst part, in there, is not that Piketty speaks in an irresponsible way that, obviously, he does not know and obviously makes no effort to know, but rather that it (de) denies substantially in The very plausible element (to say the least) of reality-France-France and Europe have to solve a big security problem-because this grain of sand contrasts its ideologico-buudgetary views. He does it, over the market, without expressing the slightest doubt about the sustainability of this denial. In other words, he puts a blindness for a product of science and makes a brand of it to sell his articles of faith. It’s called a sham.
Denys de Béchillon is constitutionalist and professor of law at the University of Pau.
.