Jul 5, 2023

Today's Brian

You can't win a Republican primary unless:
  • you tack to the right farther than everybody else
  • you constantly punch down
  • you amp up the culture war bullshit
"We should help people? OK, yeah - we'll help you rationalize your fear and hatred. Hell, we'll invent something for you to hate if you start feeling kind and generous toward anyone but the people we identify as acceptable. We're going to work hard to keep you isolated and afraid, so you won't be able to make common cause with each other - to solve problems - or demand solutions from a government that actually works - fuck that. But most of all, we're trying to make sure you never see that we're the ones creating these problems in the first place."


Jul 4, 2023

Propaganda


How do they want me to feel?
How are they trying to influence or manipulate me?
  • Learn the purpose
  • Recognize the technique
  • Get the facts
  • Weigh the facts against the purpose and the technique

PSA from 1947


And don't forget about that nasty little subliminal fuckery.

What Freedom


Philip Reid and the Statue of Freedom

One of the most significant contributions by an African American slave in the construction of the Capitol was made by Philip Reid.

When construction of the Capitol began in 1793, Washington, D.C., was little more than a rural landscape with dirt roads and few accommodations beyond a small number of boarding houses. Skilled labor was hard to find or attract to the fledgling city. Enslaved laborers, who were rented from their owners, were involved in almost every stage of construction. Philip Reid may be the single best known enslaved person associated with the Capitol's construction history.

Born around 1820, Reid was an enslaved laborer in the foundry run by the self-taught sculptor Clark Mills, who cast the Statue of Freedom. Mills was a former resident of South Carolina, where he had purchased Reid in Charleston for $1,200. Mills stated he purchased Reid, "many years ago when he was quite a youth... because of his evident talent for the business in which your petitioner was engaged, and paid twelve hundred dollars for him."

Mills brought Reid with him when he moved to Washington in the late 1840s when Mills won the competition for an equestrian statue of Andrew Jackson commissioned for Lafayette Park.

In order to construct the Jackson statue, a temporary foundry was erected south of the White House and, through trial and error, Mills, Reid and other workmen produced the first bronze statue ever cast in America. The accomplishment was extraordinary due to the absence of any formal training of any of the participants.

In 1860, the success of the Jackson statue prompted the secretary of war to give Mills the commission for casting Thomas Crawford's Statue of Freedom for the top of the Capitol's new dome. A financial agreement was reached whereby the government would rent Mills' foundry, pay him $400 a month for his services and pay for necessary materials and labor.

Reid was the only known slave working on Freedom. He worked as a laborer along side James A. Riddle, Peter Coyl, Resin (Rezin) Offutt, and Mikel Shedy (Michael Sheedy). As an enslaved worker Reid was paid directly for his work on Sundays; his owner received the payment for his work the other six days. He was paid at $1.25 per day, higher than the other laborers who received $1 a day.

Reid worked most weeks without a break between July 1, 1860, and May 16, 1861: over that period he was paid $41.25 for 33 Sundays at $1.25 per day, for "Keeping up fires under the moulds." He signed with an X by his name.
There are no known images of Reid. (?)

While unable to read or write, Reid was described by Mills as, "aged 42 years, mullatto [sic] color, short in stature, in good health, not prepossessing in appearance but smart in mind, a good workman in a foundry..."

In June 1860, casting of the Statue of Freedom began. The first step was to disassemble the plaster model of the statue into its five main sections in order to move it from the Capitol to the foundry. The model was shipped from Rome to the United States in five main sections, and upon its arrival, an Italian sculptor was hired to assemble the model. However, when the time came to move the plaster model from the Capitol to the foundry for casting, no one knew how to separate it and the Italian sculptor refused to help unless given a pay raise. Fortunately, Philip Reid was there. He figured out that by using a pulley and tackle to pull up on the lifting ring at the top of the model the seams between the sections would be revealed. The statue was successfully separated into its five sections and transported to the foundry.

Philip Reid received his freedom on April 16, 1862 when President Abraham Lincoln signed the Compensated Emancipation Act that released certain persons held to service or labor in the District of Columbia. It is not known if he witnessed the event, but Reid was a free man when the last piece of the Statue of Freedom was put into place atop the Capitol Dome on December 2, 1863.

Author S.D. Wyeth wrote in The Federal City in 1865, "Mr. Reed, the former slave, is now in business for himself, and highly esteemed by all who know him."

Thought to be Reid - unconfirmed

Today's WTF


I really don't know.
  • Worshipping at the altar?
  • Bow down or we'll kill you?
  • Variation on Shotgun Wedding?
Seriously - what the actual fuck?

Traditional Horseshit



Wildfires are bad for air quality. Fireworks can make the smoke worse.

Swirling soot from Canadian blazes is likely to compound the usual pyrotechnics pollution on July 4. Health experts urge caution.


As smoke from Canadian wildfires lingers across much of the United States, Americans will soon experience another smoke show: Fourth of July fireworks.

It may come as a surprise, but the federal holiday stands out as the most polluted day of the year in many locations across the nation, according to air quality data. Fireworks — the staple of Independence Day celebrations — light up the sky but also launch harmful pollutants. In some cases, the pollution levels from the pyrotechnics are similar to severe wildfire smoke.

Want to know how your actions can help make a difference for our planet? Sign up for the Climate Coach newsletter, in your inbox every Tuesday and Thursday.
This year, those smoky celebrations may compound air quality issues in areas already suffering from Canadian wildfire smoke, as well as blazes in Colorado and other states. Forecasts suggest that areas near the border with Canada, near Montana and Minnesota, could see a dose of wildfire smoke, and New England could see a slight smoky haze ahead of the holiday.

“It is particularly important to be aware of potential air quality impacts from fireworks when there may already be high levels of pollution in the air, including pollution from wildfires,” Melissa Sullivan, a spokesperson for the Environmental Protection Agency said in an email. The agency recommends that people — especially the elderly, children or those with lung or heart disease — try to limit their pollution exposure by watching fireworks from the direction the wind is blowing or as far away as possible.

Americans love fireworks, and consumer purchases of them have grown to more than $2 billion yearly, according to the American Pyrotechnics Association. But these explosives have been implicated with causing water pollution and sparking wildfires, and some environmentalists say that, given the times, some restraint is needed.

Bill Magavern, the policy director for the California nonprofit Coalition for Clean Air, acknowledges that “almost everybody enjoys a good fireworks display,” but the environmental impacts are becoming harder to ignore.

“At a time when climate change is exacerbating air pollution and wildfires, we need to find cleaner substitutes for fireworks, especially in areas with poor air quality,” Magavern said.

Research shows a roughly 42 percent increase in fine particulate pollutants — known as PM 2.5, which are small enough to travel into our lungs and cause respiratory issues — following July 4 firework displays. The pollution slowly dissipates, but in many areas, air quality doesn’t return to normal until around noon the following day.

The trend is evident across the United States but more prominent in major cities. In D.C., firework displays have driven 24-hour averages of particulate pollutants above 150 micrograms per cubic meter — ranging from “unhealthy” to “very unhealthy” concentrations. Ryan Stauffer, an air quality scientist at NASA, said hourly readings can be much higher; In 2020, particulate pollution levels in D.C. were as high as 670 micrograms per cubic meter.

Other major cities, including New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles, experience the same spike.




This year’s fireworks are particularly concerning because wildfire smoke has already created a hazy summer, especially on the East Coast. On June 8, wildfire smoke from western Canada floated to the eastern United States and set records for the worst air quality on record — some of the highest recorded values were around 250 micrograms per cubic meter. Smog turned the skies orange in New York City. In D.C., the Washington Monument was hardly distinguishable beyond the haze.

Stauffer said the wildfire smoke on June 7 and June 8 produced pollution levels in cities traditionally only seen near the peak of July 4. Stauffer emphasized that these pollution levels remained heightened for 24 to 36 hours.

Downtown Washington on June 8, shrouded in haze and smoke caused by Canadian wildfires. (Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/Reuters)
The recent and widespread wildfire smoke concerns some health practitioners. Stephanie Christenson, an associate professor and pulmonologist at the University of California at San Francisco, said she worries about how climate change will worsen air quality by increasing the severity of wildfires in the years to come.

“We could be seeing days to weeks of Fourth of July-like air quality issues,” she said.

Breathing in any kind of smoke can cause damage to one’s lungs, heart and brain, but fireworks contain many harmful particles that are different from other sources of air pollution. In addition to the fine particulate pollution, they contain a mix of metals, which produce the colors in the “rockets red glare” but can also be toxic to people — like lead, the EPA said. Fireworks also contain chemicals found in gasoline called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (commonly referred to as PAHs), which can cause cancer in high concentrations.

PAHs, as well as fine particulate pollution, are also concentrated in wildfire smoke.

Local weather patterns, such as wind pushing smoke from fireworks on a boat, can affect how much people are exposed to toxic air, environmental health expert Kari Nadeau said. However, she said, the dilution of pollutants in the air does not eliminate their risk.

“You might not smell it, you might not see it, but it can still affect you,” said Nadeau, chair of the Department of Environmental Health at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Much of the pollution from fireworks comes from those ignited in people’s backyards or on streets, not necessarily from grand public displays, said Jun Wu, an environmental health scientist at the University of California at Irvine. In a 2021 study, Wu and her colleagues found that California communities with policies restricting street-level fireworks saw noticeably less pollution compared with those that didn’t.

Research by Wu and her team also suggests that the differing policies mean fireworks pollution doesn’t affect communities equally. In a study published this year focused on three counties in Southern California, they found that communities with higher proportions of Hispanic residents were exposed to greater particulate pollution than other communities.

“I think people need to be aware that there’s a cost associated with firework burning, not just money, but also the health-related costs and the cost to the environment,” Wu said.

Nadeau said she hopes communities affected by the Canadian wildfire smoke will consider calling off the pyrotechnics to avoid adding more pollution to the air. If residents choose to attend fireworks displays, she said, they can protect themselves by staying away from the point of launch and watching from upwind of the smoke.

“We can think about other ways to celebrate,” she said. “That would be ideal.”

Stories Ae Essential




Why Abortion Stories Matter

Dr. Christine Henneberg is a writer and a doctor specializing in women’s health and family planning. Her memoir is “Boundless: An Abortion Doctor Becomes a Mother.”

Start with a story.

It’s the standard advice for any doctor who sets out to write, speak or advocate on behalf of her patients. Stories change minds. They change how people think about issues that can otherwise feel impersonal. Stories matter.

This is why, in the year since the overturning of Roe v. Wade, researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, have been collecting stories from doctors detailing substandard medical care and harm to patients. It is why the obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. Caitlin Bernard told the story of a patient of hers, a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio, who, unable to obtain a legal abortion in her home state, was forced to travel to Indiana to seek care. It is why, as an abortion provider in California, a state where abortion remains legal (for now), I collect and publish stories about my work — stories that, for whatever reason, stick with me.

Such as on a recent afternoon, when the last patient of the day chose to forgo IV anesthesia for her abortion because she was leaving straight from her appointment to pick up her kids from school. “I’m OK,” she said, her hands clutching the sides of the exam table. Half an hour later, I saw her in the subway on my way home, chin in her hand, staring out the window. I imagined her children waiting in the schoolyard, their eager hands thrusting into hers, their innocent questions and needs and demands.

Or the young woman who told me about her drag racer boyfriend and how, since becoming pregnant, she’d been too nauseated to ride in the car with him, instead watching from the sidelines, trying to imagine what her life would look like if they were to have the baby.

Like any doctor, I am careful to change names and identifying details to protect my patients’ privacy. This is, for the most part, easy to do, because so many of the stories I share are so common, so everyday. American women have nearly one million abortions each year. A vast majority of these are what the legal scholar and bioethicist Katie Watson calls ordinary abortions: A pregnant woman decides, for whatever reason, that she can’t or doesn’t want to give birth to a child right now. A doctor or nurse helps her safely end the pregnancy. These stories, no matter how fraught they might be with personal and moral tensions, don’t make exciting news. As Ms. Watson has written, “The imperatives of reporting preclude this headline: ‘Peaceful Day at Abortion Clinic: Ordinary People Got Quality Health Care.’”

“My life would not have been my own. I would be a prisoner subject to a body’s whims — and not my body’s whims, but the whims of a teenage boy.”

Nicole Walker, a writer and editor, in “My Abortion at 11 Wasn’t a Choice. It Was My Life.” Read the guest essay.

“It’s important that the government is in sync with the public opinion, but I don’t think they are.”

Dwyarrn, one of the participants in an Opinion focus group with 12 pro-life voters. Read the focus group’s discussion.

“Sometime soon, I am going to meet a patient who has no ability to leave the state, and I am going to have to tell her that her baby has a lethal condition, and she is going to have to carry a pregnancy to term against her will.”

David N. Hackney, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist, in “I’m a High-Risk Obstetrician, and I’m Terrified for My Patients.” Read the guest essay.

“There are more of us than there are of them. That’s especially true if American men recognize that their way of life is also under attack. Men also have sex for pleasure. This is not just a women’s issue.”

“My fellow pro-lifers and I will also need to make the case to expectant mothers, and fathers too, that their unborn children are, like the rest of us, dependent and needy persons.”

Erika Bachiochi, a conservative legal scholar, in “What Makes a Fetus a Person?” Read the guest essay.

“The overturning of Roe v. Wade reveals the Supreme Court’s neglectful reading of the amendments that abolished slavery and guaranteed all people equal protection under the law. It means the erasure of Black women from the Constitution.”

Michele Goodwin, a professor of law at the University of California, in “No, Justice Alito, Reproductive Justice Is in the Constitution.” Read the guest essay.

Yet ordinary abortion stories play an important role in the fight for abortion rights and reproductive justice. They remind us that abortion is normal. They humanize the one in four women in America who will have an abortion in her lifetime.

Unlike ordinary abortion stories, the details of extraordinary abortions cannot be easily disguised. The details are what make them extraordinary: The very young patient. The rape. The state where she could not obtain the abortion and the state where she ultimately did.

In medicine, doctors share extraordinary cases to educate ourselves and one another about the range of diagnoses we must consider, exam findings we may encounter or procedures we might be called on to perform. Extraordinary stories also serve a role in a democracy, to paint a vivid picture for constituents of the full range and implications of the legislation passed by elected officials, under which we and our children must live.

Extraordinary abortion stories remind us that pregnancy can be a matter of life and death. Pregnancy can — and does — result from rape, incest and intimate partner violence. Pregnancy can — and does — happen to children as young as 10. Governors and legislators and Supreme Court justices can — and do — make decisions that result in children being forced to give birth.

When Dr. Bernard was reprimanded by Indiana’s medical board for violating her young patient’s privacy (she discussed the case with a reporter without revealing a single traceable element of the patient’s identity), we saw proof of a new, disturbing reality of the post-Roe era: Abortion opponents don’t merely want to ban abortion. They want to silence the doctors who bear witness to the disastrous consequences of such cruel and unjust legislation.

Now more than ever, abortion providers must share the ordinary and extraordinary stories we witness — to humanize our work, to advocate for our patients, to move people. This is the impetus behind my writing and the work of other doctors. It is the impetus for the U.C.S.F. study documenting the substandard reproductive care post-Roe, whose preliminary findings, released in May, are chilling to read. This is why humans tell stories: so that our words are not only heard and read but also remembered.

In a post-Roe world, abortion providers see our patients’ rights to privacy and bodily autonomy violated every day. It is our ethical duty to expose that violation to the world.

Today's Today

Happy 4th everybody
Buzz Aldrin

On Independence Day, what would those who lost loved ones in the Buffalo mass shooting have to say about justice in America? If we summoned Black women, who disproportionally experience death and trauma during childbirth, to reflect on the inalienable right to life, what hard truths might we hear about their fears for themselves and their unborn children? What musings about liberty could we expect from those who endure unjust sentencing or are pulled over for driving while Black?


Frederick Douglass Knew What False Patriotism Was

In 1852 Frederick Douglass delivered what may be his most famous address, “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” This time of year, quotations from the speech dart around Black social media as a subtle pushback on uncomplicated celebrations of American independence.

Douglass wondered what the enslaved might say if they were called from the plantations to reflect on themes of liberty, justice and equality. How might their words differ from the prose of the free orators normally asked to comment on American ideals? There is a revolution in the reorientation of perspective, when the powerless are given space to speak. That hasn’t changed.

On Independence Day, what would those who lost loved ones in the Buffalo mass shooting have to say about justice in America? If we summoned Black women, who disproportionally experience death and trauma during childbirth, to reflect on the inalienable right to life, what hard truths might we hear about their fears for themselves and their unborn children? What musings about liberty could we expect from those who endure unjust sentencing or are pulled over for driving while Black?

Our nation’s problems and the litany of lingering injustices are not unknown to us, but there is a certain pressure to put our complaints aside around this holiday in particular. On the Fourth of July we are encouraged to unfurl our flags, belt out a rendition of “God Bless America” and grill burgers in humble gratitude.

Reflecting on the demand for patriotism, Douglass said, “As a people, Americans are remarkably familiar with all facts which make in their own favor. It is a fact, that whatever makes for the wealth or for the reputation of Americans will be found by Americans.”

Our country wants a certain version of the American story told and will laud anyone willing to tell it. But uncritical celebration is a limited and false definition of patriotism. Instead, recounting the full story of America and asking it to be better than it is can be an expression of love.

Douglass challenged the idea that certain truths should be overlooked. He composed this speech in the aftermath of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which required all escaped slaves to be returned to their enslavers. He said this act of Congress turned the nation into a “hunting ground for men” and marred the whole republic because “your lawmakers have commanded all good citizens to engage in this hellish sport.”

Douglass put his protest into conversation with the ideals celebrated on the Fourth. He recognized that the founding fathers were “great men” who “staked their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor on the cause of their country.”

The problem wasn’t the vision of the country we remember on this day. The fault lay in the fact that some got left out.

Douglass had the audacity to believe that America's story was not finished until the country kept all her promises. There is a hidden affection in the stinging words of rebuke.

Over 100 years later, in his “I Have a Dream” speech, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., would echo Douglass: “When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men — yes, Black men as well as white men — would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned.”

Today if Americans protest systemic injustice or resist the efforts to remove the history of racial oppression from school curriculum, it is the demonstrators, not those invested in intentional forgetting, who some people deem anti-American.

Douglass’s patriotism was more than resistance. In the early years of the Civil War, he saw signs of unity and hope. In 1862 he delivered another July Fourth speech. As David Blight notes in his biography of Douglass, the orator’s language underwent a change from 1852 to 1862.

A decade prior, Douglass, speaking to white Americans, referred to the founders as “your fathers.” Douglass and other Blacks were outsiders. In 1862, he took ownership of them, including African Americans in the grand narrative of American history. The “you” of the American Revolution and its principles became a “we” during the battle against the Confederacy. Speaking of the Union effort in the Civil War, he said, “We are only continuing the tremendous struggle, which your fathers, and my fathers began eighty-six years ago.” Because white Americans had been willing to suffer for Black freedom during the Civil War, we were starting to live up to the idea that all men were created equal.

He understood that no great thing could be had without genuine effort and pain, and that holds true today. One cannot simply read more Black literature after violent and public deaths of African Americans. We have to do the hard work of reforming policing, undoing gerrymandered voting districts and eliminating myths about differences between Blacks and whites.

On Independence Day in 1875, Douglass took to the podium a third time. Echoing his first speech, he asked what Black people had to do with the Fourth of July. Now, years after the Civil War, Black people’s place in the American narrative is an established fact: “Colored people have had something to do with almost everything of vital im­portance in the life and progress of this great country.”

I don’t think we have to be proud of everything this country has done to be proud of our progress despite unrelenting opposition. The saga of Black people in America is not just a tragedy; it is also a triumph.

Douglass recognized that his version of the American story was not often recounted. So he called for a Black press to rise up and make it known. America had to face the truth and only those who had endured its hypocrisies but still maintained some hope had the perspective to tell it.

Douglass expanded the meaning of American patriotism. Rather than focusing on the gratitude the country demanded of us, he reminded the nation what it still owed its populace. The nation could not request songs of praise without including Black accomplishments in its lyrics. It could not laud the founders of this nation without following their example by continuing to fight for justice for all.

Our national tendency to see only the best of America was standing in the way of truly becoming great. He thought enough of this country to tell it the truth. We would be better off if more of us did the same.

Jul 3, 2023

Here It Comes

Today is the last day
some of us will have
two functioning eyes,
and a full set
of fingers and toes.









And kids -
don't mess with fireworks.
Best if you leave it the adults
who've been drinking heavily
since about noon.

Today's Tweet #2



The France Thing


I've been wondering about Marie Le Pen's gang - where they might factor in, and how Le Pen would play this thing.

I think I have the beginnings of my answer now.

She probably didn't directly encourage assholes to deface a holocaust memorial, and it's not likely she wrote a memo to any of the French equivalents of Proud Boys and 3%-ers saying they should rush right down to their local protest and amp things up.

But she can point at the "Muslim Problem" and then sit back and carp about "rampant violence" and the need to restore order, and how that weak sister Macron isn't able to do enough because what we really need is a strong leader to clamp down on immigration and stand up to rioters and show 'em who's boss and blah blah blah.  


Race riots in France could give far-right the edge Marine Le Pen needs to win in 2027

When Nahel Merzouk, a 17-year-old of North African origin, was shot dead by police at a traffic stop in the Paris suburb of Nanterre on Tuesday morning, it looked like an event that would unite the French in shock and revulsion at the long-known violence and racism in the law enforcement community.

The killing was condemned across the political community, with President Emmanuel Macron calling it “inexplicable” and “inexcusable”, and even police authorities distancing themselves from the incident, which involved a teenager being shot at point-blank range simply because he refused to comply with the officer’s demands.

France’s far-right leader, Marine Le Pen, was initially on the back foot: this case, filmed and posted on the internet, seemed to prove the argument that minorities were systematically targeted by a police force that considers itself above the law. Meanwhile, the left-wing opposition, led by radical firebrand Jean-Luc Mélenchon, said it was the consequence of decades of neglect in the banlieues, the poor, multi-ethnic, high-density suburbs around the big cities.

But that was before the riots. The five nights since the shooting saw Paris and other French cities plunge into chaos as rioters have run rampage. Schools, police stations and city halls have been set torched, while cars, trucks and buses have been set ablaze.

Mr Macron, whose second term has already been disrupted by opposition to his pension reforms, is now facing perhaps the biggest challenge to his presidency yet. Although tens of thousands of police have been deployed to contain the violence, the anger has spread across the country, to Marseille, Lyon and Lille, with fears growing that they could disrupt the Tour de France cycling race. Mr Macron himself was obliged to cut short an EU summit in Brussels on Friday to return to Paris, and to postpone this week’s planned three-day state visit to Germany.

The rioting has also transformed the political discourse. The initial horror over the shooting of a teenager has now turned into a debate about law and order.

This is fertile territory for Ms Le Pen, who has long railed against what she sees as France’s drift into permissiveness and lawlessness. She lambasted the government on Twitter on Sunday as “a power that abandons all constitutional principles for fear of riots, which contributes to aggravating them”, adding, “Our country is getting worse and worse and the French are paying the terrible price for this cowardice and these compromises.”

She did not directly address the shooting but condemned the National Assembly for holding a minute’s silence for Nahel last week, saying, “Unfortunately, there are young people in our country every week…It’s terrible, but I think that the National Assembly should perhaps measure a little the minutes of silence that are carried out.”

And in a video address yesterday she lambasted the “anarchy”, called on authorities to declare a state of emergence or curfew, and attacked Mr Mélenchon for “conniving” and “morally exempting these criminal acts”, promising that they would face a reckoning with “the nation and history”.

This appeal to law and order is in direct contrast with her energetic encouragement of the violent yellow vest or “gilets jaunes” anti-government fuel protests in 2019 and 2020.

Ms Le Pen has detoxified her image in recent years. She changed the name of her party from the National Front to the National Rally, and in last year’s presidential campaign, her posters simply call her “Marine”, handily distancing her from her xenophobic father, Jean-Marie Le Pen.

The 54-year-old put pocketbook issues at the heart of her campaign, pointing to sharply rising fuel and food prices as proof of Mr Macron’s economic mismanagement. Her pivot was aimed at working-class voters struggling with rising costs, as she campaigned in rural France and former industrial towns.

She recast her party as a movement for the forgotten masses, bypassed by globalisation and the Paris elites, and even talked up her struggles as a single mother and her cat breeding. The rebrand has worked: she has neutralised many fears of her and normalised her image, with polls today rating her the nation’s second favourite political personality, behind the former prime minister Édouard Philippe.

The riots put Mr Macron in a bind. He was quick to capture the emotion after the shooting but has so far failed to contain the momentum of the subsequent anger. If he echoes Ms Le Pen’s language, he risks being called a hypocrite over the killing.

However, the longer the violence continues, the more Ms Le Pen will benefit. She can continue to blame the authorities for the chaos, saying this is the inevitable result of the moral laxity she has always warned against. And with Mr Macron term-limited, Ms Le Pen can look to the next presidential election, in 2027, as her moment.