On the immigrant and the French – Le Monde:

‘The term had disappeared from the French political landscape for nearly four decades. The "immigrant worker" is back, thanks to a labor shortage, which justifies, according to the government, the "regularization" section of the bill intended to "control immigration and improve integration" presented on Wednesday, February 1, by the Council of Ministers. This is the 20th immigration reform since 198...’

(…)

‘The far right has greatly benefited from these recurrent debates on immigration, which have been reduced to a role-playing game in which players claim to be responding to the expectations of French people by "acting." Most of the controversy is already about the strategies and posturing that could allow the Darmanin-Dussopt bill to pass. Voters deserve better than this potentially harmful joust. They deserve a wide-ranging debate over France's role in global migration currents and the state of its relations with emigrant countries, in which the needs of the economy and the potential for training would be set out. The goal would be to emerge with an overall philosophy that has been decided upon, as Germany is in the process of doing, together with concrete measures and the means to implement it.’

Read the editorial here.

The language is a bit vague, but that can be an advantage too, most important, the editorial is right about this: the voters have ‘expectations’ fueled by ‘the debate’ (articles, talk shows, podcasts, demonstration, public outrage etcetera) and then the politicians must ‘act’ or act as if they act.

This is democracy of course, a bit of theater is unavoidable.

But the same what can be said about many doctors could be said about politicians, it would be encouraging if they would be willing to admit that sometimes they can’t do anything, that it is beyond their control. After all, they are politicians, not shamans.