Condorcet, Premier mémoire sur l’instruction publique.
____________________
MAIS...
"Mais c'est mon beau-frère tout de même !"
... Car les réseaux sont parfois inextricables : exemple, le même, courageux jusqu'à la témérité, prompt à dénoncer des faits [mais rarement jusqu'au bout ou il attend trop longtemps, se contentant en général de parler autour de lui parfois sans même citer clairement les gens impliqués*] .. va, comme si c'était tout naturel, faire état d'autres, plus graves encore.. (mettons un vol de la part d'un notable, mais un vrai vol, pas une combine glauque) lors d'une succession (pas d'héritiers ou lointains.. et que l'on ne s'est pas trop hâté de rechercher) précisant qu'il le tient directement d'un proche témoin de la chose.. lequel s'est tu (et n'a parlé qu'à lui, qui s'est également tu!).. car "il ne pouvait pas, il avait des emprunts pour sa maison et était seul à travailler" etc.. lequel ensuite a été nommé sur un meilleur poste au loin. Difficile de faire réaliser que la corruption, c'est AUSSI cela.
* Avec toujours le même argument "je ne pouvais pas car ça impliquait X. qui est un ami.. et n'y est au fond pour rien" (il y a en effet des degrés dans la corruption et certains pusillanimes, à peine mouillés ou quasiment de force, vont parfois ensuite redouter d'être emportés dans la charrette (cela arrive toutefois, ne le nions pas.)
A cela certes on s'attend de la part de n'importe quel quidam ; mais pas de celle d'engagés : réseaux, familles, amis, époux, l'idéologie familialiste du clan rend les choses quasi inextricables. Ensuite, les mêmes s'étonnent que la justice n'ait pas fait son travail*. Mais 10 ans après, s'il n'y a pas ou très peu de témoins pour oser confirmer (comme le beau-frère tout compte fait, "qui avait des emprunts") comment la justice le pourrait-elle? Comment exiger davantage de la justice que d'un beau-frère ?
*"Les gens sont si personnels, ils ne veulent rien faire, il n'y en a pas un pour se lever car "ils" tiennent tout le monde".. (Oui, même celui qui s'exprime ainsi : les "gens", c'est nous tous).
___________________________________________
"But it's my
brother-in-law all the same!"
... Because the networks are
sometimes inextricable: example, the same guy, brave to rashness, quick to
denounce some facts [but rarely to the justice or he waits too long, or, worst, he
talks just like gossip about these facts without even quote clearly the people
involved*] .. this guy, as if it was natural, reports at the end of a dinner..
other ones, more serious .. (for example a theft of a noticeable, but a real
thref, not an usual dark scheming) in a heritage (no heirs or distant.. and that
one was not too quick to seek) reporting clearly that he holds this affair
directly from a close, witness of the
thing .. who don't speak (or only spoke to him, who says anything, it was secret !).. because
"he could not speak, he had a loan for his house and was alone working with four
kids" etc. .. who then was named to a better job off. Difficult to realize
that corruption is ALSO that.
* With always the same
argument "I could not because this would implies X, who is a friend .. and
he did nothing or very little" (in fact there are degrees of corruption,
and some shy, barely "wet" or almost by force, are afraid to be carried away in the cart (it
happens, however, do not deny.)
We expect that kind of speech
from redneck, typical person, but not from one engaged against corruption ! networks,
families, friends, spouses.. are making a family-oriented ideology of the clan
virtually impenetrable. Then, the same guy asks himself, angry, why justice has
not done its job *. But 10 years too late, if there is no or very few brave witnesses
to confirm (as the brother-in law in fact! "who has four kids") how Justice
could it? How demand more from the Justice than from your brother-in-law ?
* And it is the eternal tune : "People are so selfish,
they want to do nothing, there's no one to stand up because they
"wet" everybody".. (Yes, even one who says these speech :
"People", is all of us).
"Let the people know to distinguish the voice of reason from that of corruption and soon he will see fallen at his feet the golden chains prepared for him, otherwise he himself will present his hands to the chains and, of a submissive voice, will pay the seducers who make him as prey to tyrants. "
Condorcet, First Submission of Public Instruction.
"Let the people know to distinguish the voice of reason from that of corruption and soon he will see fallen at his feet the golden chains prepared for him, otherwise he himself will present his hands to the chains and, of a submissive voice, will pay the seducers who make him as prey to tyrants. "
Condorcet, First Submission of Public Instruction.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire