philippe manière

101...

Si vous ne regardez qu'une seule vidéo aujourd'hui, regardez celle-ci. 2 minutes 28. Antenne 2, 1984. Elle est anthologique. Sur le sujet de l'échec et du rapport culturel à l'entrepreneuriat, regardez cette vidéo. C'est Steve Jobs. Sur Antenne 2. En 1984. Le mec qui a inventé l'objet qui vous permet de partager vos idées marxistes depuis votre iPhone. Et qu'est-ce qu'il dit sur la France ? Deux choses. Premièrement, l'échec. Il dit que le problème fondamental de l'Europe c'est le rapport culturel à l'échec. En Amérique, à Silicon Valley, "on passe son temps à échouer, quand on se casse la figure, on se relève et on recommence". En France, si tu loupes ton coup en sortant de l'université, "cela vous suit toute votre vie". En 1984 il posait le diagnostic. 42 ans plus tard, rien n'a changé. Deuxièmement, et c'est là que ça devient magnifique, il dit texto : "Il faut des centaines de mini entreprises de logiciels" et surtout "les capitaux à risque sont plus efficaces entre les mains du secteur privé" et "le gouvernement ne doit pas tenter de mettre la main dessus, elles doivent appartenir à ceux qui prennent des risques". Steve Jobs, 29 ans, sur la télévision française, est littéralement en train d'expliquer aux Français que le capital privé alloué par des gens qui prennent des risques produit plus de valeur que le capital public alloué par des bureaucrates. En 1984. Sur Antenne 2. Devant Mitterrand. Le mec qui a construit la boîte la plus valorisée de l'histoire de l'humanité vous disait il y a 42 ans exactement ce qu'on vous dit aujourd'hui. Et on est toujours en train d'avoir le même débat.

Maternity ward in Odesa. Again. The hardest was evacuating newborn twins on ventilators. When Russian Shaheds attacked, doctors moved 33 pregnant women and 19 newborns to safety in a bomb shelter. Then helped put out the fire.

Entièrement d’accord,cher @nbouzou . C’est ce qu’a fait le @medef ds le cadre des municipales et fera beaucoup plus encore pour les présidentielles. Le debat public devra prendre en compte la contribution centrale de l’entreprise et la rudesse de la concurrence internationale !

Let me explain what just happened 👇 5 minutes before the President announced a halt to attacks on Iran… someone placed a $1.5 BILLION bet on stocks going up and dumped $192 million in oil. 5 minutes… These trades were 4 to 6 times larger than anything else in the entire market. Whoever did this wasn’t guessing. You don’t risk $1.5 billion on a hunch. There was zero public indication this announcement was coming. No leaks. No press. Nothing. The only people who knew were in the room when the decision was made. Someone in that room picked up a phone. And within minutes they made more money than most Americans will earn in a thousand lifetimes. In a single trade. On a war that cost you $4+ a gallon gas and $16 billion in tax dollars. American citizens funded this war. Politicians are profiting from it. This is not the first time. Every major announcement from this administration has had massive suspicious trades right before it dropped. Tariff reversals. Policy shifts. War decisions. This is the most blatant insider trading operation in the history of American politics. It’s not even close. And it’s happening over and over in broad daylight. You would go to federal prison for trading on a tip from your cousin. These people are front running war decisions with billion dollar bets and nobody will ever ask a single question. Nobody will be investigated. Nobody will be charged. By tomorrow this will be buried under the next satisfying headline. Just like last time. And the time before that. The game is rigged. And they’re not even trying to hide it anymore…

Nantes mise à part avec la victoire de Johanna Rolland, et Lyon avec l’écologiste Doucet, on peut tirer une énorme leçon à gauche de ce second tour des municipales. Cette leçon est la suivante : Paris : victoire sismique de Grégoire, Marseille : puissante de Payan, Lille, Rennes, Strasbourg, Douai, Montpellier, toutes ces villes gagnées par des socialiste qui ont refusé l’alliance avec Lfi. Et en face naufrage arithmétique et moral à Toulouse, Besançon, Poitiers, Tulle, Avignon… Presque partout où des socialistes, pour un plat de sièges, ont fait alliance avec le mélenchonisme, ils ont été sanctionnés. Comme dirait l’autre, vous avez eu le déshonneur et vous avez la défaite. Dans la perspective de l’élection présidentielle Olivier Faure ne va pas devoir rendre des comptes. Il va devoir partir.

In 1956, the UK 🇬🇧 and France 🇫🇷 requested America's help to secure the Suez Canal. America 🍔 replied "FUCK OFF", humiliated its allies, made a deal with the enemies of the West, and destroyed European empires. Here is the whole story: In July 1956, Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, controlled until then by Britain and France. They prepared a joint response with Israel, expecting at minimum passive support from Washington. That support never came. The United States refused to endorse the operation and moved rapidly to block it. The method was not rhetorical; it was financial and immediate. Washington threatened the stability of the British currency, refused emergency assistance, and signaled that it would not tolerate a prolonged intervention. At the United Nations, it backed resolutions calling for a ceasefire and withdrawal. The message was explicit: stop, or face systemic consequences. The effect was brutal. British and French forces had achieved their immediate military objectives on the ground, but the operation collapsed under American pressure. Within days, both governments were forced into a humiliating retreat. Two European powers that had dominated global trade routes for a century were publicly compelled to reverse course by their principal ally. This was not a minor disagreement inside an alliance. It was a rupture that exposed a hierarchy. The United States did not merely refuse assistance; it actively sabotaged the operation. From a European standpoint, this amounted to a direct betrayal of shared strategic interests. The consequences were immediate and long-term. Suez marked the definitive end of independent British and French power projection. After 1956, neither country could conduct a major external operation without American approval. Political elites in both capitals understood that their room for maneuver had narrowed to what Washington would tolerate. Decolonization accelerated sharply. The signal sent to colonial administrations was clear: the metropole could no longer guarantee control if challenged. In Africa, the Middle East, and Asia, independence movements gained momentum as the credibility of European authority collapsed. The imperial framework, already under strain, unraveled faster after Suez. The American role in this shift was decisive. Washington opposed the maintenance of European colonial structures because they conflicted with its own strategic objectives. It sought access, influence, and alignment in newly independent states. European empires were obstacles to that expansion. By forcing Britain and France to withdraw in Suez, the United States demonstrated that it would not support the preservation of their overseas systems. What followed was a redistribution of influence. As European control receded, American economic, financial, and security networks expanded into the same regions. Oil arrangements, military partnerships, and monetary dependence increasingly aligned with US structures. The old empires disappeared, but their space did not remain empty. Suez was therefore not only the end of a crisis. It was the moment when Western leadership shifted definitively across the Atlantic. Britain and France lost the capacity to act autonomously on the world stage, and the United States established the terms under which the rest of the West would operate.

"Pour un plat de lentilles" Écoutez l’édito percutant d’@VenturaAlba sur le paradoxe Olivier Faure. 🎙️ "Ce qui est valable pour Olivier Faure à l’Assemblée, ne l’est plus sur le plan local […] pour un plat de lentilles !"

Assez ! Par cette décision du Conseil constitutionnel, un trafiquant condamné pourra désormais conserver le domicile depuis lequel il opérait son trafic. Les supposés sages qui vivent loin des quartiers ravagés par la drogue viennent ainsi d'offrir aux avocats de la défense un levier supplémentaire pour préserver le patrimoine des dealers. Pour que le domicile familial utilisé comme base arrière du deal soit confisqué, il faudra que le juge le décide, le motive, l'assume. Certains le feront. D'autres non. Pendant ce temps, les familles qui subissent le trafic dans leur cage d'escalier, dans leur rue, devant l'école de leurs enfants, n'ont pas de principe constitutionnel pour les protéger de cette réalité quotidienne. Le droit du trafiquant prime donc sur l'intérêt de la société qui doit permettre de frapper les narcotrafiquants au portefeuille. D'aucuns nous opposeront l'état de droit. Mais un état de droit où le législateur ne peut plus traduire en droit la volonté du peuple face à un phénomène qui ronge notre société mérite qu'on s'interroge sur qu'il protège vraiment. Notre droit accumule depuis des années des garde-fous pour les délinquants et les criminels, sous l'influence de juridictions non élues qui, décision après décision, défont ce que le législateur construit. Cette décision en est une illustration de plus. Le législateur doit réagir sans délai en faisant de la confiscation la règle tout en permettant au juge de pouvoir y déroger dans des cas strictement définis par la loi et sous obligation de motivation expresse. Si des verrous constitutionnels continuent d'y faire obstacle, la question devra être tranchée par les Français eux-mêmes. C'est ce que nous proposons avec Nouvelle Énergie. Pour #enfinir avec le laxisme qui protège ceux qui nuisent et rendre aux Français un État qui protège les gens honnêtes.

En s’alliant avec un parti aux idées antisémites, racialistes et antidémocratiques, pour battre une personnalité de centre-droit, le Parti Socialiste se couvre de honte. Un crachat au visage de Blum, Jaurès, Mendes France. Les Français finiront par se réveiller.

Sean Penn missed the Oscars ceremony where he received an Oscar, and went to Ukraine instead. Thank you for standing with Ukraine, Sir! Congratulations!

Ton mec que tu surprends dans ton propre lit avec une meuf et qui te dis " t'inquiète pas, ça veut rien dire, c'est technique". Ah ben ça va.

🚨🗣️ Jacques Levy, ancien candidat socialiste à la mairie de Toulouse écrit une lettre ouverte à François Briançon, le candidat PS qui a décidé de s’unir avec la LFI à Toulouse : « Depuis plus de trente ans, nous avons défendu un idéal commun, celui des grandes figures de la gauche. Comment as-tu pu l’oublier en te précipitant le soir du premier tour entre les bras de LFI pour un poste qui n’est même pas celui du maire de Toulouse ? Je suis triste pour toi et pour l’oubli des combats que nous avions menés ensemble contre Dominique Baudis à l’époque, mais dans la dignité du débat démocratique. Pour un socialiste sincère, se coucher devant un parti antisémite, soutien du Hamas, dont l’égérie s’appelle Rima Hassan, qui ne souhaite que le "grand remplacement" et qui n’a pour seul programme que de créer le désordre pour espérer un jour voir Mélenchon président de la République. Ton attitude me rend triste ; je suis malheureux de voir tous mes rêves, qui ont été la force de ma vie, disparaître en une soirée. Il n’est pas grave de perdre une élection. J’en sais quelque chose, j’en ai perdu deux. Par contre, je ne me suis jamais couché devant ceux qui voulaient m’effacer de l’histoire. En t’alliant avec LFI, tu trahis ton histoire et celle de ta famille, mais aussi l’amitié que je te portais. Je suis triste pour toi, car non seulement tu ne seras jamais maire de Toulouse, mais tu laisseras le souvenir d’une trahison à nos valeurs. Le courage n’est pas une obligation, mais il élève celui qui le pratique. » #Municipales2026

Vous imaginez que le PS à #Toulouse vient de faire alliance avec un parti, LFI, dont le leader affirmait que la tuerie islamiste commise par Merah contre des enfants juifs à Toulouse était un complot visant à cibler les musulmans. Honte à vous @fbriancon ! #Municipales2026

Congratulations to everyone involved in 'Mr. Nobody Against Putin' on winning the Oscar for Best Documentary. If you haven’t seen it yet, you should. It’s an extraordinarily insightful film that shows exactly how dictatorships sink their claws into institutions and use them to shape everyday life under their rule. It exposes the true depth and reach of Putin’s propaganda in Russian society. Countering propaganda is one of the most important parts of our work, and few films have done more in this fight than 'Mr. Nobody Against Putin.' Putin’s propaganda is a weapon, perhaps even more dangerous than nuclear arms. It is the fuel driving the war against Ukraine. This is a phenomenal achievement by Pavel Talankin, David Borenstein, and everyone else involved. I’m proud that one of my foundations supported the film's impact campaign and its awards and festival promotion, helping it reach the widest possible audience. Mr. Nobody Against Putin is one of the most important anti-war statements of our time. The Oscar and the BAFTA were both richly deserved.

There was a time when common sense existed in that room. 🔴 1978 Oscars: Vanessa Redgrave used her acceptance speech to attack "Zionist hoodlums”. Minutes later, Paddy Chayefsky, WWII veteran wounded at the Battle of the Bulge, takes the stage after winning for Network. 👉 His message: “The Oscars are not a platform for antisemitic political propaganda”.

Over the past week alone, the Russians struck Ukraine with 1,770 attack drones, more than 1,530 guided aerial bombs, and 86 missiles, including more than 20 ballistic ones. Each of these missiles contains at least 60 foreign components supplied to Russia in circumvention of sanctions. The schemes used for such supplies are known, and they must be shut down. If the world does not have enough air defense capabilities to close the sky against ballistic missiles in Europe and the Middle East simultaneously, we must deprive the Russians of the ability to assemble missiles at their factories. I am grateful to everyone who continues to work on sanctions to protect lives.

Oh ben ça alors, une Caronienne antisémite. C'est une vraie surprise.

En Espagne, on fait des listes de commerces juifs. On les interdit des universités. Et le gouvernement agite la cause palestinienne pour cacher ses affaires de harcèlement et de corruption. Hier, @franceinter consacrait une émission entière à leurs « vertus pacifistes ».

This is how much the Lebanese trust the Israel Defense Forces (IDF): After iftar, they go out for shisha, tea, and snacks while watching Israeli airstrikes on Hezbollah targets, without the slightest fear that Israel would ever target them.

“Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?” Nate White, an articulate and witty writer from England wrote the following response: A few things spring to mind. Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem. For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace – all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed. So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump’s limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief. Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing – not once, ever. I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility – for us, to lack humour is almost inhuman. But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is – his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty. Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers. And scarily, he doesn’t just talk in crude, witless insults – he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness. There is never any under-layer of irony, complexity, nuance or depth. It’s all surface. Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront. Well, we don’t. We see it as having no inner world, no soul. And in Britain we traditionally side with David, not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs: Robin Hood, Dick Whittington, Oliver Twist. Trump is neither plucky, nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that. He’s not even a spoiled rich-boy, or a greedy fat-cat. He’s more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt of privilege. And worse, he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British: a bully. That is, except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead. There are unspoken rules to this stuff – the Queensberry rules of basic decency – and he breaks them all. He punches downwards – which a gentleman should, would, could never do – and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless – and he kicks them when they are down. So the fact that a significant minority – perhaps a third – of Americans look at what he does, listen to what he says, and then think ‘Yeah, he seems like my kind of guy’ is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people, given that: • Americans are supposed to be nicer than us, and mostly are. • You don’t need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man. This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people, and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss. After all, it’s impossible to read a single tweet, or hear him speak a sentence or two, without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of shit. His faults are fractal: even his flaws have flaws, and so on ad infinitum. God knows there have always been stupid people in the world, and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty, or nastiness so stupid. He makes Nixon look trustworthy and George W look smart. In fact, if Frankenstein decided to make a monster assembled entirely from human flaws – he would make a Trump. And a remorseful Doctor Frankenstein would clutch out big clumpfuls of hair and scream in anguish: ‘My God… what… have… I… created?' If being a twat was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set.