“La Croix” readers explain their choices

“La Croix” readers explain their choices
“La Croix” readers explain their choices

► Daniel

“I remember the last presidential elections: my sister voted for Mélenchon in the first round and, between Macron and Le Pen in the second, preferred to vote blank, which deeply shocked me. How could one not take a position against the extreme right? Terrible irony. Two years later, this is, I believe, the option that I will take, as none of the available proposals suit me. En Marche still supports euthanasiaThe union of the left is only a front for LFI and its “anti-Semitic revolutionaries”.

The RN and its incompetent populists remain. So I wonder. Should I vote usefully, once again, so that my vote is forgotten by the winner once the crisis has passed? And that the situation will be exactly the same in three, five or ten years? Or should I let chaos set in? The truth is that neither of these choices suits me. And I don’t want to have anything to do with either of these two outcomes. In the second round, with a heavy heart, I will vote blank.

► Laurent

“As a practicing Catholic, I finally voted for Ensemble after much hesitation. I could have chosen the Green/NFP candidate. The ecological and environmental issues are major. The project of a tax reform for more justice is relevant. I agree, however, with this denunciation of the so-called Macronist progressivism. The inclusion of abortion in the Constitution and the law on the end of life are moral failings.”

► A binational reader

“Last Sunday, I was a poll worker in the 12th arrondissement in Paris. At my table, it was the candidate of the New Popular Front who won the majority hands down. I would have loved for it to happen like this in France, the country that welcomed me and where I made my life. Let’s react and not leave our country in the hands of the RN.”

► Bernadette Poinsot

“In the readers’ letters published on June 21, two people write that the RN advocates the exclusion of foreigners and even hatred. We wonder what allows them to assert these false things with conviction. The RN only calls for welcoming only a number of foreigners that France can feed, house, and care for with its resources (therefore without getting into further debt) and it also calls for prohibiting entry into France to those who do so illegally, which is clearly the one who then causes problems. It is not about hatred but common sense. (…) I am a Christian and am happy that the Gospel advocates love for foreigners. But RN voters deserve the love of others as well.

► Anne-Sophie

« I am a convinced social democrat and European, with a marked allergy to “isms”. I am lucky to have in my constituency an outgoing EELV MP who has done good work, for whom I will vote again in the second round. I had also told her, the day after the dissolution, of my deep distrust of LFI and its leader (its leaders?), whose methods and practices have nothing to envy of the RN.

If I had to vote for an LFI candidate to block the RN, I would do so with a heavy heart, and in the hope that enough more moderate NFP deputies would be elected to weigh on the extremes. But what I fear above all is, in order, a victory of an incompetent RN (cf. its management of the Front National town halls in the past), in the hands of Putin, racist and fundamentally anti-democratic, but also a center-left coalition, where LFI would not be capable of compromise to move the country forward and would continue to slide towards an anti-Semitism that does not say its name.

► Pascale

“As in the first round, I will vote RN. I have no confidence in the LR even though I have always voted for them. I feel like they have betrayed their voters. And there is no way I will vote for a candidate Macron who, for seven years, has done nothing but destroy France, whether abroad and particularly in Africa, and with all these laws that are contrary to my ethics.”

► Bernard Idrac

“Before voting, every citizen should ask themselves this question: “What kind of society do I want for tomorrow, in France, in Europe and ultimately in the world?” A society of respect for others, for all others, of respect for the common good, of sharing wealth allowing everyone to live with dignity, a society where fundamental freedoms are protected for all: of thought, of religion, and of course of equality between women and men.

This society that our parents and grandparents built, often in suffering, and that we must continue to develop, we cannot leave it in the hands of an ideology whose roots are indisputably: the exclusion of others, racism, anti-Semitism, intolerance, and contempt for democracy. All fascist regimes were built by exploiting the mechanisms of democracy and then, once power was conquered, by cutting all bridges and never leaving it again. There are sadly many examples in history but also today all over the world, including in Europe with Hungary.

So, there is no need to hesitate. We must vote for the alliance of left-wing parties, whose respect for democratic principles it would be indecent to make a trial of intent. This has been demonstrated since 1981. And it would be just as indecent if those who asked, and obtained, that all left-wing citizens, without exception, block the FN in 2002 (but also at other times), did not have the same attitude, without weakening, in the same dramatic circumstances, to protect our freedoms and our future. To the polls, citizens!

► C. H.

“Like many voters, I will have to choose between two radicalities, contrary to my values. You don’t build a country in anger, you don’t solve a problem without contextualizing it, without analyzing its causes and consequences. Our politicians pontificate, sometimes insult each other, make jokes on social networks, are in the immediacy of the response and not in the demonstration.

Everything seems orchestrated to sell an individual, a party and not to build a just state. We stir up hatred by intellectual shortcuts; we fuel fear by using anger and resentment; we count on the ignorance of a system, of a situation to affirm without proving, without explaining; we shout, we gesticulate, but we build nothing.

Our politicians bear the responsibility for the non-choice that will be mine on Sunday. By forgetting the Nation, by forgetting their role as exemplary, as leaders of men, as managers of the common good, they have weakened democracy (…). Where are the Voltaires arguing against fanaticism? Where are the Victor Hugos defending with words the fight against poverty and encouraging education to give the people a voice? Where are the Jaurès demonstrating, proving, that the worker is a man? Where are these orators like Briand defending a project not in belching but in compromise, in reflection, valuing constructed thought; those who debated with passion, conviction, but above all with reason; who confronted their ideas and who based their rhetoric on argument and not on opinion.

The adage says it: anger is a bad advisor. It is hubris against wisdom. I will have to choose by default because France, its politicians have lost the sense of nuance and the common good.

► Xavier

“The vast majority of people who vote RN want first and foremost regulation of immigration, security, a return to republican order, to keeping their word. They want to be considered and not forgotten, they are tired of people only focusing on minorities… And above all, they hate this double talk from all the media who constantly say that the intolerant, the dangerous, the bad guys are the members of the RN when in fact, it is the members of LFI who are outrageous and disrespectful, who spend their time dividing, setting people against each other. In my constituency, I have the choice between the plague or cholera in the second round. I don’t know what to do, I am horrified by this dilemma…”

► C. Pechberty

“In my constituency, I have the choice between RN and NFP. I hear the call to refuse the domination of the RN but I cannot cast my vote for NFP. I can neither vote with the intention of countering the RN, nor bring to the Assembly an LFI candidate whose ideas she defends are also a repellent. Neither Charybdis, nor Sylla.

I also want my vote to be the realization of my voice. So I will vote blank, because I still believe that a policy of project agreements for living well together deserves to exist, carried by men and women located between the two extremes; I refuse the violence of the words and the hatred of the other that they carry, the unreality and the destruction of our republican values ​​”liberty-equality-fraternity”. I want to believe in the capacity of men to agree on the important points that the governance of our country requires. And if this does not happen by Monday, at least let this hope remain possible…”

► Paul

“I am an RN voter but the second round in my constituency will see a Macronist and an NFP from civil society face off. What guides me is the interest of the nation and given the way the Macronists have governed, I forbid myself from voting for them. The profile of the NFP candidate, rather moderate and committed to humanitarian work, corresponds to what would make me doubt the most and potentially switch to them, but the immigrationist program of the left-wing alliance puts me off. I would vote blank I suppose.”

► Philippe

“Unfortunately, arguing is useless in trying to convince. No, the RN vote is not a vote of support, it is the only answer that voters have found to express their anger, anger fueled by social networks. A moderate vote does not create any buzz. The extremists, and in particular the RN, have mastered the codes perfectly.”

► B. M.

“I chose a candidate from the “Ensemble pour la République” group in the first round. For the second round, he came in third place behind an NFP candidate (first place) and an RN candidate (second place). This third place leaves the candidate no chance of winning the election. Whether he stays or not, next Sunday, I will choose the person from the NFP who came in first in order to block the RN. Why? Because the RN, through its contempt for human values, the incompetence of its members, is quite incapable of making the “right choice”. And if I think the same thing for LFI, I believe – and hope – that this group will find itself isolated within the NFP in the face of the other groups in this alliance.”

► Jean-Pierre Raffin

“A weekly practitioner, imbued with the thinking of the Church as conceived by our dear Pope Francis (even if I do not share certain positions on the role of women and Latin ecclesiastical celibacy), I will vote, to confront the RN and its hatred of foreigners and diversity in all its aspects, for a candidate whose behavior does not suit me (in particular the contempt for the non-human living world, shared by the RN, LR, Ensemble pour la République, the communists, many socialists, etc.) because as Robert Barbault said, I think that biodiversity is humanity’s life insurance.”

► Paul Coumeff

“There is no need for a qualm in a two-option vote (duel or referendum). Abstaining or voting blank or invalid is giving half a vote to the future winner. According to an old adage: in the first round you choose, in the second round you eliminate.”

► J. M. J.

“If all those who voted RN knew the sources and history of this party, would they continue to vote for it? I don’t think so. When culture and memory are absent, history unfortunately risks repeating itself!”

-

-

PREV Football (L2): The future is darkening for Bordeaux, which will not be bought by Fenway Sports Group
NEXT For EELV of the Bay of Saint-Brieuc, “we must tackle the causes” of green algae