It's easy to criticise, I admit. And I criticise a lot.
The negative usually needs less arguments, it looks more self-explaining.
It is more motivating sometimes. The positive side needs more effort, more involvement, better arguments. I might have chosen the easiest solution then.
But I am asking myself: Am I too negative, too critical, too aggressive sometimes?
It is hard to find the right balance between my very positive general attitude towards life, towards people, towards time, and my political self which has a tendency to search conflict.
I often take an argument further than I myself believe in it. Playing the devil's advocat. Because I like a discussion based on counter-arguments that can find to each other somewhere in the middle.
I am picking little details without true importance and make them look relevant, because I am kind of a perfectionist. And it's fun to find these little things. Especially considering chaos theory.
So don't take me too personal, even if I quote you or if I am playing with your favourite baby. It's never against you! A political blog needs to encourage debate, and a European democracy cannot live without an open discourse in which we try to find the best solutions.
Hence, when you see my negative side popping up, take it as an argumentative challenge, show me that I am wrong, because I like the moment when I realise I am wrong or I was imprecise. This little moment of guilt that can ruin a whole day.
Then, the perfectionist in me turns against himself, pointing his finger at me saying: Look, bastard, you're not an inch better than those you criticised!
Pierre Moscovici: Union libre
3 hours ago