Departing for an overseas tour early this week, which will culminate in gatherings in Brussels at the EU summit today, the French president gave as much as a two-hour interview that looked more like a session of public psychotherapy than a speech of a politician.
The conversation was exclusively about what Macron thinks, about his doubts and experiences. And it would be both boring and uninteresting, if not for a tiny nuance. The day before the interview was recorded, the French Council of State, the main body that oversees the constitutionality of the authorities’ actions, fully approved both the statute and the operating system of the new government agency Viginum. The name is made up of two words: vigilance (“surveillance”, sometimes – “s-urveillance”) and numéri-que (“digital” or “digital”).
Thus, all citizens of France (more precisely, all of its inhabitants) automatically fell under the cap of the digital Big Brother: any of their statements on social networks and on other Internet platforms, if and when this statement arouses suspicion, can have far-reaching and very far-reaching consequences.
The purpose of creating this digital monster-spy, as they frankly write about it, “to prevent foreign powers from interfering in internal political life, especially during the election period.”
There are no other clarifications even in the official order. The leadership is su-bordinate to the Secretary of State for Security and D-efense, and he already giv-es an answer directly only to the President of the cou-ntry. Of course, I would like to know what is meant by “foreign intervention”. If a Facebook user living in Russia writes that he sympathizes with the ideas of the ultra-right and starts a debate on this topic, will this be regarded as interference?
Or if a user living in France writes that Zemmur is impressed by him, this is also “interference in the electoral process”?
Note that, despite all the statements, both public and behind the scenes, concerning the previous campaign, evidence that Russia intervened in it was never found.
If you do not consider Marine Le Pen’s trip to Moscow and her meeting with Vladimir Putin as such an interference, but it was, as it were, not entirely secret, but quite the opposite – under the numerous flashes of cameras. Apart from TV reports and TV reporters.
An awkward moment arose when computers in the election headquarters of the same Macron were hacked. But then the press (greedy for sensations, if it was about Sarkozy or Fillon with his costumes “at the expense of a friend”) made a solidarity decision not to publish anything from the vast array of data at all.
“In order not to influence public opinion,” as it was emphasized. An extremely interesting position, since, in fact, elections are used to ensure that people make decisions depending on how their opinion has changed.
And another remark (there are no trifles in Macron’s actions) – the order to create Viginum was signed on July 14 this year, yes, on the day of the main national holiday in France, Bastille Day. While the citizens were having fun and drinking that day, the president decided exactly how he would follow them, if and when they decide to change their political sympathies.
The EU summit, which is due to conclude today, after which the mighty will go on Christmas break, follows two important European international events. First, the meetings of the Visegrad Group, where Macron was treated not too diplomatically, calling (this was done by Viktor Orban) a “political enemy”, but at the same time supporting a number of proposals for the further development of nuclear energy. And secondly, the Eastern Partnership, where they tried to console Zelensky in different ways, at the same time promising both Ukraine and other countries participating in the project another two billion euros. It is inconvenient not to promise a gift before the holidays, this can also be understood.
The summit, having rec-eived an agreed position f-rom both the Visegrad Gro-up and those who are part of the Eastern Partnership, will again discuss the “face of morality” of Russia, which wants to “attack and suppress” someone. Such a powerful campaign in the textbooks on counter-propaganda was previously called “a distraction to an insignificant goal,” that is, to a phenomenon that does not exist at all. The media use this technique to shift interest from really meaningful decisions to myths and horror stories created by the media themselves.
The EU leadership, which seems like a somewhat chaotic gathering of sometimes overly emotional characters, understands rationally and very accurately: the house of cards “Russian horror story”, as soon as the facts of Moscow’s real intentions and actions begin to leak out, will collapse faster than you can count aloud to five.
To prevent the fragile structure from collapsing, on the one hand, Paris, Brussels and Co. will talk about the “horrors of the Putin regime”, and on the other hand, they will sign orders to start spying on many of their own citizens.
Considering those headless sums of pixels that anyone can convince of anything. And I was afraid – really afraid – of those small users who are not yet afraid to speak honestly, although Big Brother is already looking after them. The skirmish in Europe today is between those who have lied to and those who are trying to argue with them, giving arguments and arguments. Let’s see who takes it in the end.