At the moment a little argument is spreading in the French political and intellectual world, which speaks volumes about who we are: whoever reveals some risk is accused of “pessimism”, serious accusation which discredits the person who is so accused: the pessimist sees everything in black, so his opinion has no interest, since he would swear it rains in full sun.
Of course, there may be, in some cases, a pathological dimension to a systematic pessimism; in particular when it comes to people for whom everything was better before, simply because before they were younger. Of course also in our complex world, where expectations play a role, pessimistic forecasts can contribute to a climate that lead to the worst: for example by announcing that a country is insolvent, lenders are encouraged to move away, making the country truly unable to meet its deadlines.
However, it would be terribly dangerous to discredit pessimism.
First, because, unfortunately, in the darkest periods of history, the pessimists have been right, and those who listened were spared a lot of trouble. Ben Gurion, for example, was correct to say, that to his knowledge, only a few pessimists had left the concentration camps alive.
Secondly, because those who in recent years, have announced impending ecological, economic and financial disasters have not been contradicted by the facts.
Finally, because the systematic denunciation of pessimism and the systematic apology of optimism correspond to a posture of dominance of the affluent: the rich can afford to be optimistic because they know that in all maelstroms, they will get out of it better than others, for example, the current financial crisis may be to them a source of profit. Thus Guizot said: « The world belongs to optimists and pessimists are merely spectators ». Indeed, the poorest, they, are only spectators, and they are right to be in fear now in particular about the risk of downgrading.
Denouncing pessimism is therefore to be satisfied of the world as it is, and somehow, optimism is conservative. Pessimism is revolutionary.
Being pessimistic does not mean being resigned to the contrary, it means being able to analyze threats, understand them, take them seriously and act. For we can be both pessimistic in the diagnosis and optimistic in the action to be taken. For example, today I remain resolutely pessimistic about the medium-term evolution of the economic and financial crisis, if we do not continue to act globally to stop it, and very optimistic about the possibility of exceeding it, and on the wonderful future that may open beyond.
Picabia was correct in writing that: « the pessimist thinks that a day is surrounded by two nights, while the optimist knows that a night is surrounded by two days ». But the pessimist knows, wrote the young Jean Racine, that nights can be more beautiful than days. And it is precisely adversity that introduces a man to himself.