The offspring of a singular and a Zemmour Merkel

On the one hand, we read the criticism of excessive immigration, an Islam that would be difficult to dissolve in the republic, the perverse effects of some anti-racism, the dangers of sectarianism ... Criticism also those who criticize legitimacy of French identity, for whom "France is no longer content, just a container" (p. 164). Clearly, De Closets, the FN asks good questions and the answers precisely because it brings are not (always) good, so do not leave the preserve of those questions. In the first part of the book, sometimes it looks like Finkielkraut - without philosophical density - Zemmour or without the corrosive flamboyance, but without either, slippage against-productive (especially regrettable Pétainists land excursions of the latter ...). The journalist, now in his eighties, has - for sure - retained all his verve and his producer beautiful pen and good formulas ("in a country where reality has no place, any truism can create the event "- p 109)..
But on the other hand, in the economic field, we find the same journalist, vituperative against the ease, credit life and sinecures. We find his usual targets: unionism - which he calls "syndicratie" -; (189 p.) its targets, nay, his obsessions of a lifetime: "So long as we do not break the bureaucratic oligopoly, labor, administrative suffocating the French economy, it remains under-competitive and languid" (p. 260). Poor France! That she had the right inspiration to be German! Ah, the "Germanic pragmatism", "Germany, which [a] defeated unemployment by the rigor and not by lax" (p. 246) (p. 238): this is a great example that France should seek to imitate! Merkel Elysee!
Therefore, the societal and conservative Liberal plan economically, François de Closets could be taxed with rightist and even doubly right. But the reporter does not care labels, especially politicians labels that it considers outdated. On this point also, it is given willingly reason, when we witness the spectacle of the left and the right, close to many economic policies but seeking by all means to oppose on symbolic divisions (gay marriage, security ...).
Whatever the label so. What I find most annoying in the book is this curious paradox that wants one worries of a dispossession of the Nation by mass immigration or multiculturalism, but is natural to subject the economy that country to international markets. The reign of world capitalism seems obvious, while "the return to national protectionism [is] simply a stupidity" (p. 209), (unless it is extensively practiced by the United States, Japan, China, Russia, South Korea and many others). The economic policy of the European Union is never disputed by the author, while the neglect of the country comes as an anthem. Closets is not so full of contradictions, who praised "our famous social model (...) national" (p. 158), and a hundred pages later, urged to "shocks measures such as removing 35 hours , social thresholds, the wage freeze ... "(p. 258). He sees no other way out than to fit the mold of European liberalism. The single currency is a manifest failure, but it is possible return to the franc as castigated Closets; he is attentive to competition undocumented, but ignores the European phenomenon of "posted workers", whose number in France has multiplied by 20 between 2000 and 2010. Refusing the dissolution of France "bottom "but to live with the end of its sovereignty" from above ": beautiful inconsistency which the author does not seem to realize.
Does this mean then that the only way would be to rely on the FN, far more coherent on this? Certainly not. And the author is right to attack the demagogic aspects of the program of this party: return to retirement at age 60, immediate increase of nearly 20% of the minimum wage, increased social benefits, etc., not to mention the highly questionable national priority for employment and housing. But in the economic field, as in others, it is not because this party decided to pin amount of sensitive subjects that we should prefer to look away.