Yesterday, after the marathon session the day before of the Nice CA Community which voted on the constitution project of the Nice Côte d’Azur Metropolis (the deliberative assemblies of the other intercommunalities in the hinterland having been more expeditious), Christian Estrosi publicly presented (and to the general public via the local gazette with a communiqué that was highly educational!).
A somewhat redundant ceremony, featuring the mayor of Nice and certainly the future “boss” of the new institution, who was an attentive host to the other mayors representing the 45 municipalities that will form the Metropolis, with an American-style staging including all the trappings: a packed room with applause prompting, a wait of more than half an hour beyond the scheduled time, a scenographic protocol with the entrance of the mayors, film, nominal call to step onto the stage creating a group effect, allegiance speeches by the three presidents of other intercommunalities, a loyalty speech by the President of the General Council and heir apparent Eric Ciotti, and finally, the “crowning” speech of Christian Estrosi, both “builder,” “visionary,” and “prophetic,” delivered a notch above the notes.
And to conclude… Three anthems, one official “La Marseillaise” and two song-anthems, the Provençal ‘Coupo Santo” and the local “Nissa la Bela.” Frankly difficult to make it less sober, especially as Christian Estrosi and his team had constantly explained during the debate that this “Metropolis” was merely the logical evolution in the dynamic continuity of the former Agglomeration and the current Community. So why transform a politico-administrative act into a kind of year zero of the life of Nice and its region?
But let’s put aside this somewhat Hollywood style and return to the political significance of this act.
On this side, there is no doubt that this is a good resolution for the future of this territory and its residents. We agree with Eric Ciotti’s analysis, which highlighted in his speech the “federation of resources” and the “positivity for the general interest” of this decision by setting objectives such as “excellence and modernity.”
In the face of the inevitable changes of the world where we live and our children will live, with its constant accelerations that will permanently mutate our environment and ways of living, there are two possible answers: confinement that leads to decline and the finiteness of people or a people, or the desire for a future, the consideration that there is a new chance to seize by taking the risks of the changes that are necessary.
Naturally, we are well aware that the birth of the future Nice metropolis alone will not be enough to change the situation.
But we are among those who believe that this is a decision going in the right direction.
If the Polish sociologist Zygmunt Bauman wrote back in 1994 that “Europe is an adventure,” who today, except for a few scatterbrained individuals reasoning without cause, substituting details for overall reasoning, would want to turn back the clock on a European community that, on the contrary, needs much more of “Europe”?
We are not naive either about the political reasoning of Christian Estrosi: being President of the Nice Côte d’Azur Metropolis will give him much more weight at the national level, allowing him to have more financial means and territorial management, and it will also be him who can distribute cards for political candidacies in various elections (national and local) with the influence that comes with it. Because, without a doubt, Christian Estrosi will undoubtedly be an attentive President vis-à-vis the mayors of communes in the Metropolis and generous in meeting their needs and demands. But one thing is already clear: it will be him who will choose the menu of meals!
Marc Concas, the socialist opponent we interviewed the night before last, understood and explained it perfectly: Christian Estrosi’s choice is to “retreat” locally to preserve his assets, especially in anticipation that Nicolas Sarkozy may not be re-elected President of the Republic, thereby becoming the “Lord” of his barony in the consequent reorganization of the UMP chessboard.
“How many divisions?” – said Stalin, talking about the Pope.
One last consideration: Christian Estrosi defined the future Metropolis as a “community of fate” freely chosen by its populations. So why this name Metropolis, which evokes bureaucratic technocracy and does not evoke any sense of soul?
Wouldn’t it have been better and more appropriate to use the suffix “polis,” which, in the noble sense of the term, means what in antiquity the Greeks who invented democracy wanted it to be: a social entity, understood as a community of rightsholders, free and autonomous, highly structured. In short, the body of citizens.
