NationStates Jolt Archive

Today the seven main potential candidates of the Parti Socialiste (left-of-centre) appeared before party-members to outline (in brief) what their policies would be should they be chosen as the party's presidential candidate in November.

Several of them criticised Nicolas Sarkozy, the hardline right-wing leader of the Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (main right-wing party), and Laurent Fabius said something along the lines of "We do not want as our Head of State someone whose desire is to be Bush's poodle" (obvious reference to Tony Blair there, of course).

Sarkozy will probably be one of the two main contenders for the presidential election (in May), against a yet-to-be-decided socialist candidate (possibly Ségolène Royal, a representative of the Parti Socialiste's right wing). Sarkozy is a keen admirer of the "Anglo-Saxon economic model" and has promised sweeping reforms of France's socio-economic system, which most people take to mean he wants to "Americanise" it (something he's never denied). He's travelled to the US several times, and was recently received by Dubya himself (despite the fact that Sarkozy is only Minister of the Interior - basically, head of French police).

What are your thoughts? If you were a French citizen, would you support Sarkozy, or Royal (who will undoubtedly also steer France to the right, but not in a "let's smash everything and do what the Americans do" manner)?

What saddens me is that Royal is about as right-wing as you can get within the Socialist Party, and Sarkozy is as right-wing as you can get in the UMP. He'd be the most "libéral" (in the French sense of the word) president we've ever had. Either way, we're in for five years of smashing up of social policies.

My only comfort is that France won't take Sarko's policies lying down. If he does try to Americanise our economy, they'll be millions of us out in the street to stop him.

I rather like Sarkozy. He's got some good ideas on how to fix some of the structural problems that the French economy currently faces, and he's a realist, which is a pleasant thing to come from France. I'm a strong fan of economic liberalization, because it's done good things in the other developed economies that have embraced what so many French pundits deride as the "Anglo Saxon Model". A strong France is good for the EU and the US.

I rather like Sarkozy. He's got some good ideas on how to fix some of the structural problems that the French economy currently faces, and he's a realist, which is a pleasant thing to come from France. I'm a strong fan of economic liberalization, because it's done good things in the other developed economies that have embraced what so many French pundits deride as the "Anglo Saxon Model". A strong France is good for the EU and the US.

Agreed.

And, even at that, the language of the French Socialists shows an awful lot of desperation, blatant appeals to nationalism of this kind are what we see the more desperate party in the US use to get last minute votes. It seems like the French Socialists are saying "if it's from those damnable Anglophones it's obviously bad, yadda yadda yadda."

On an unrelated note, all (or almost all) French politicians are better than this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marie_Le_Pen).

On an unrelated note, all (or almost all) French politicians are better than this guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marie_Le_Pen).

Ugh. Him.

I miss Third Republic France. You know, back when they actually did things and mattered.

I hope they don't americanise in France, personally. I'd much rather see a politician who ran on a policy of streamlining government programs, than one who runs on basically giving up and throwing out tax cuts, etc.

I hope they don't americanise in France, personally. I'd much rather see a politician who ran on a policy of streamlining government programs, than one who runs on basically giving up and throwing out tax cuts, etc.
Somehow, I doubt that the Americanisation that the Socialists oppose would involve anything that a resident of the US would recognise as American.
Probably closer to "Britishizing" (as if the government could even drag them that far), but that wouldn't work nearly as well for the fear-mongering crowds.
That rabble don't raise itself, y'dig?

Somehow, I doubt that the Americanisation that the Socialists oppose would involve anything that a resident of the US would recognise as American.
Probably closer to "Britishizing" (as if the government could even drag them that far), but that wouldn't work nearly as well for the fear-mongering crowds.
That rabble don't raise itself, y'dig?

I'm just saying, I don't want to see tax cuts, privitization of a number of programs, etc, which is possible for a right winger in France. I defidentally don't want to see erosion of civil liberties.

If by that you mean romans guide gaul well, and corsicans(whom are french) lead France well, then yes.

If by that you mean romans guide Gaul well, and corsicans(whom are french) lead France well, then yes.

Teh joke was deleted... but yeah, that is what I meant.

And Corsicans are italians ETHNICALLY. France just owns/owned it.

How is "Bonaparte" French? Nappy there was Italian.

And Corsicans are italians ETHNICALLY. France just owns/owned it.

How is "Bonaparte" French? Nappy there was Italian.

http://limewoody.wordpress.com/files/2006/03/aw_jeez_not_this_shit_again2.jpg

Teh joke was deleted... but yeah, that is what I meant.

And Corsicans are italians ETHNICALLY. France just owns/owned it.

How is "Bonaparte" French? Nappy there was Italian.

Corsicans were ethnically corsican, or on a broader sense mediterranean. Regardless, that had little to do with it. Napoleon spent his very early life in corsica, a french owned territory, then the rest in france. Regardless of who had the larger ethnic portrayal in corsica, napoleon was raised French through his life.

I won't consider someone american if they are born in hawaii, move to japan at seven, and live there until they are 50.

Corsicans were ethnically corsican, or on a broader sense mediterranean. Regardless, that had little to do with it. Napoleon spent his very early life in corsica, a french owned territory, then the rest in france. Regardless of who had the larger ethnic portrayal in corsica, napoleon was raised French through his life.

I won't consider someone american if they are born in hawaii, move to japan at seven, and live there until they are 50.

I love it when Europeans get caught up in racist minutiae.

Today the seven main potential candidates of the Parti Socialiste (left-of-centre) appeared before party-members to outline (in brief) what their policies would be should they be chosen as the party's presidential candidate in November.

Several of them criticised Nicolas Sarkozy, the hardline right-wing leader of the Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (main right-wing party), and Laurent Fabius said something along the lines of "We do not want as our Head of State someone whose desire is to be Bush's poodle" (obvious reference to Tony Blair there, of course).

Sarkozy will probably be one of the two main contenders for the presidential election (in May), against a yet-to-be-decided socialist candidate (possibly Ségolène Royal, a representative of the Parti Socialiste's right wing). Sarkozy is a keen admirer of the "Anglo-Saxon economic model" and has promised sweeping reforms of France's socio-economic system, which most people take to mean he wants to "Americanise" it (something he's never denied). He's travelled to the US several times, and was recently received by Dubya himself (despite the fact that Sarkozy is only Minister of the Interior - basically, head of French police).

What are your thoughts? If you were a French citizen, would you support Sarkozy, or Royal (who will undoubtedly also steer France to the right, but not in a "let's smash everything and do what the Americans do" manner)?

What saddens me is that Royal is about as right-wing as you can get within the Socialist Party, and Sarkozy is as right-wing as you can get in the UMP. He'd be the most "libéral" (in the French sense of the word) president we've ever had. Either way, we're in for five years of smashing up of social policies.

My only comfort is that France won't take Sarko's policies lying down. If he does try to Americanise our economy, they'll be millions of us out in the street to stop him.

If you people put half as much effort into working as you do into rioting, France would have the best economy in the world right now.

If you people put half as much effort into working as you do into rioting, France would have the best economy in the world right now.

Ad hominem attacks destroy legitimate argumentation and start flame wars. Please refrain from throwing any more.

My only comfort is that France won't take Sarko's policies lying down. If he does try to Americanise our economy, they'll be millions of us out in the street to stop him.

What exactly do you mean by "Americanise" the French economy?

If you people put half as much effort into working as you do into rioting, France would have the best economy in the world right now.

That's an interesting comment, given that you don't know me. I happen to have a stable job, which I worked very hard to get and work hard to keep, thank you very much.

What exactly do you mean by "Americanise" the French economy?

What he means by "Americanise" is to turn over nationalized industries to private owners, and begin a massive neo-liberal campaign to deregulate industries and harm the power of labor unions.

What exactly do you mean by "Americanise" the French economy?

Sarkozy's grand idea is to model France's economy after what's often referred to as "the Anglo-Saxon model". In other words, he wants to cut out social legislation, "free the market" more, etc...

What exactly do you mean by "Americanise" the French economy?

Probably another term for the 'Anglo-Saxon model'.

That's an interesting comment, given that you don't know me. I happen to have a stable job, which I worked very hard to get and work hard to keep, thank you very much.

God bless you, then. But don't les francaises also have 5 weeks of paid vacation, along with numerous religious holidays, even though France is basically a majority atheist nation, and don't all the stores close after 7?

Ad hominem attacks destroy legitimate argumentation and start flame wars. Please refrain from throwing any more.

Aww, ain't nothing wrong with a little bit of fun.

God bless you, then. But don't les francaises also have 5 weeks of paid vacation, along with numerous religious holidays, even though France is basically a majority atheist nation, and don't all the stores close after 7?

Have you been listening to Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter lately?

Sarkozy's grand idea is to model France's economy after what's often referred to as "the Anglo-Saxon model". In other words, he wants to cut out social legislation, "free the market" more, etc...

Well, we never really had nationalized industries here in the US. Not in the same sense that some European nations have had nationalized industries.

Also, our labor unions are in decline because the companies they worked for became incredibly ineffecient, and could no longer compete. If we were to try to prop them up with government support, we would be accused of protectionism and violating the WTO treaty.

It's also useful to note that the President who "ended welfare as we know it" was President Clinton.

Have you been listening to Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter lately?

Have you been listening to Noam Chomsky or Bill Maher lately?

By the way, what was that about ad hominem attacks?

Have you been listening to Noam Chomsky or Bill Maher lately?

By the way, what was that about ad hominem attacks?

Yes, btw, I have been reading Noam Chomsky lately. You should give it a shot before you knock it. I've read Ann Coulter, also, just to understand the roots of her insanity.

Questions are not attacks. It just sounded like you had a Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter esque view of France. Having known several French foreign exchange students, I have a different view of France.

God bless you, then. But don't les francaises also have 5 weeks of paid vacation, along with numerous religious holidays, even though France is basically a majority atheist nation, and don't all the stores close after 7?

That's not the half of it: they even have a day off to recover from all those holidays.

I say keep it. Life in France is not half as stressful as it is in the UK. And I'd rather have the French lifestyle than a couple of numbers go up 0.1%. J'adore the french lifestyle, and the social model is a small, but important part of it. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water, and don't, whatever you do, adopt our shallow, materialistic and broken (British) model for society.

Yes, btw, I have been reading Noam Chomsky lately. You should give it a shot before you knock it. I've read Ann Coulter, also, just to understand the roots of her insanity.

Questions are not attacks. It just sounded like you had a Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter esque view of France. Having known several French foreign exchange students, I have a different view of France.

I take French in school and we do focus quite a bit on contemporary France, so I know what I'm talking about here.

Hell, I might even read some Noam Chomsky myself, to understand the roots of his insanity.

What he means by "Americanise" is to turn over nationalized industries to private owners, and begin a massive neo-liberal campaign to deregulate industries and harm the power of labor unions.

Oh my God, he might make it so that Danone International isn't a militarily strategic industry anymore?

That's not the half of it: they even have a day off to recover from all those holidays.

I say keep it. Life in France is not half as stressful as it is in the UK. And I'd rather have the French lifestyle than a couple of numbers go up 0.1%. J'adore the french lifestyle, and the social model is a small, but important part of it. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water, and don't, whatever you do, adopt our shallow, materialistic and broken (British) model for society.

You know those numbers? You're one of them, now what do you do?

25% of France's youth is unemployed thanks to their socialist economy. Either they change soon or they completely go down the gutter.

I take French in school and we do focus quite a bit on contemporary France, so I know what I'm talking about here.

Hell, I might even read some Noam Chomsky myself, to understand the roots of his insanity.

Well, at least you'll give it a shot. Quite a few people I know won't even try to understand where their opponnents are coming from in an argument, it makes for a lame debate.

You know those numbers? You're one of them, now what do you do?

25% of France's youth is unemployed thanks to their socialist economy. Either they change soon or they completely go down the gutter.

France isn't socialist. They follow an outdated, statist philosphy called social democracy, in which the government runs important industries directly, and pretends to be socialist. I don't think its the welfare state in France that is causing unemployment, I think it just more has to do with some rather crappy decisions made by "public" and private industry in france.

France isn't socialist. They follow an outdated, statist philosphy called social democracy, in which the government runs important industries directly, and pretends to be socialist. I don't think its the welfare state in France that is causing unemployment, I think it just more has to do with some rather crappy decisions made by "public" and private industry in france.

Socialism, is by definition, government control of the economy, with elements of capitalism.

But mostly government control, so France is indeed socialist.

Socialism, is by definition, government control of the economy, with elements of capitalism.

But mostly government control, so France is indeed socialist.

No it is not. Socialism is democratic control of the means of production by the people. Nowhere in France can you find self management by workers.

France is not socialist. The french Parti Socialiste betrayed the original goal of socialism, along with the UK Labour Party, the German SDP, and any other member of the "Socialist" International *cough.*

France isn't socialist. They follow an outdated, statist philosphy called social democracy, in which the government runs important industries directly, and pretends to be socialist. I don't think its the welfare state in France that is causing unemployment, I think it just more has to do with some rather crappy decisions made by "public" and private industry in france.

Well, one might ask, from a game theory perspective, what a public official has motivating them to make correct decisions about business.

A business executive gets fired if the company takes a hit. A public official can campaign and bamboozle the electorate, and get re-elected, no matter how sorry his business decisions are.

Well, one might ask, from a game theory perspective, what a public official has motivating them to make correct decisions about business.

A business executive gets fired if the company takes a hit. A public official can campaign and bamboozle the electorate, and get re-elected, no matter how sorry his business decisions are.

That was my point. It's not really "public" industry because there is no real accountability.

That was my point. It's not really "public" industry because there is no real accountability.

Ah, so the nationalized industries rapidly run into the toilet.

Wait Americanize France? They're going to put up a french Haburtian and invide the oil companies to control their government?

Wait Americanize France? They're going to put up a french Haburtian and invide the oil companies to control their government?

Well, first they have to put up those "Please Speak English" signs everywhere.

What exactly do you mean by "Americanise" the French economy?
I'm assuming that it really means adopting a few free-market reforms to their economy that might shift the country's social policy to one more in line with that of Britain.
In fact, by "American" standards they'd probably still be considered filthy Eurotrash-Commies.
The closest American equivalent I can think of would be to pretend that it is the 50's and begin complaining that the Welfare system is an attempt to Sovietize our economy and make us filthy communists who drink vodka and wear winter coats all year.

Well, first they have to put up those "Please Speak English" signs everywhere.

And then they'll rename the country "Freedom" and its inhabitants "Freedomese."

Oh my god, what could be worse than allowing Apple to make the iPod compatible with whatever file formats they should wish! Dearie me, this whole "Anglo-Saxon" thing is making my head spin!

I'm assuming that it really means adopting a few free-market reforms to their economy that might shift the country's social policy to one more in line with that of Britain.
In fact, by "American" standards they'd probably still be considered filthy Eurotrash-Commies.
The closest American equivalent I can think of would be to pretend that it is the 50's and begin complaining that the Welfare system is an attempt to Sovietize our economy and make us filthy communists who drink vodka and wear winter coats all year.

The British economy this spring didn't strike me as anywhere near the US in nature.

Customers used to the most abysmal customer service I have ever witnessed in my entire life. At every level.

Watching a large corporation (formerly government owned) use 135 disparate applications that don't talk to each other to manage their CRM.

Watching customer service reps sitting at tables, taking notes on pieces of paper, anticipating what the computer program would want as input without seeing the screen, and asking the customer questions. Then, hordes of young women running with those notes to the next room, where other people input the data - and if something is missing, having to stop, run the paper into another room, where it waits in a file until the customer calls back.

It was all I could do not to tell them that they were unbelievably stupid idiots.

What he means by "Americanise" is to turn over nationalized industries to private owners, and begin a massive neo-liberal campaign to deregulate industries and harm the power of labor unions.

Essentially, yes. Sarkozy supports the privatisation of Gaz de France, a public company, despite the fact that it's showing record profits. It's privatisation for its own sake - ideological neoliberalism.

I rather like Dominique de Villepin, but I don't if he's popular enough to get the Presidential nod for the UMP in France. I'm not a fan of Sarkozy at all exactly because of his right-wing policies.

Regardless, I'm still a PS fan and I'm rooting for Ségolène Royal. Girl power! :D

I rather like Dominique de Villepin, but I don't if he's popular enough to get the Presidential nod for the UMP in France. I'm not a fan of Sarkozy at all exactly because of his right-wing policies.

Regardless, I'm still a PS fan and I'm rooting for Ségolène Royal. Girl power! :D

Chirac won't be the one to decide who'll represent the UMP; if he were, he would never let Sarko be it. ;)

If it boils down to Sarkozy vs. Ségolène (in the second round), I'll vote Ségolène of course, but I really don't want her as President either. I don't care what gender the President is; what I care about is their policies. And if we do have a PS president, I'd rather it were... I don't know, Jack Lang for example. Or possibly Hollande.

I'll be voting for a genuinely left-wing party in the first round, anyway.

My only comfort is that France won't take Sarko's policies lying down. If he does try to Americanise our economy, they'll be millions of us out in the street to stop him.

Isn't it wonderful to see with what high regard the democratic process is held by certain factions in some countries? A man (or woman, for that matter) wins an election, and the losers, rather than accepting that the winner obtained the most support from the voters and that it may have had something to do with his policies, and then working with him to reach an agreement of some kind, promise to go "out in the street to stop him."

How do you say "Sore Loserman" in French?

BTW: when's the last time you saw a right-wing/conservative party "out in the street" after losing an election?

Ségolène Royal is hot. Vote for her.

Besides, last conservative that was going to change things was Merkel, and look at her.

I mean, the very word "conservative" means something along the lines "to preserve"... Ségolène is more likely to do reforms than Sarkovsky

Isn't it wonderful to see with what high regard the democratic process is held by certain factions in some countries? A man (or woman, for that matter) wins an election, and the losers, rather than accepting that the winner obtained the most support from the voters and that it may have had something to do with his policies, and then working with him to reach an agreement of some kind, promise to go "out in the street to stop him."

An essential part of the democratic process - people mobilizing to get the government to do what they want it to do.

Isn't it wonderful to see with what high regard the democratic process is held by certain factions in some countries? A man (or woman, for that matter) wins an election, and the losers, rather than accepting that the winner obtained the most support from the voters and that it may have had something to do with his policies, and then working with him to reach an agreement of some kind, promise to go "out in the street to stop him."


Indeed. It's a national tradition, and we're very proud of it. :D

Oh, and we do it against the left just as much as against the right; it has nothing to do with "losing an election". You're letting your ignorance show.

Besides, when there are literally millions of people taking to the streets, you have to start wondering whether maybe, just maybe, the policies in question are a tad unpopular.

Ségolène Royal is hot. Vote for her.

Besides, last conservative that was going to change things was Merkel, and look at her.

I mean, the very word "conservative" means something along the lines "to preserve"... Ségolène is more likely to do reforms than Sarkovsky

Sarkozy, not Sarkovsky. And I can assure you, he'll be doing reforms. He's a hardcore neoliberal, such as we've never really seen before. Though standing for a conservative party, he's right-wing essentially in the sense that he wants to make major reforms to deregulate the economy.

Indeed. It's a national tradition, and we're very proud of it. :D

Protesting is fine. Losing minorities trying to shut down a country (for example) because they don't like the winner's policies is not fine.

Oh, and we do it against the left just as much as against the right; it has nothing to do with "losing an election". You're letting your ignorance show.

Please name one occasion when the left was subject to the same treatment. I can't remember any, but maybe it's just my ignorance showing. ;)

Besides, when there are literally millions of people taking to the streets, you have to start wondering whether maybe, just maybe, the policies in question are a tad unpopular.

Of course they're unpopular--with the losers.

Please name one occasion when the left was subject to the same treatment. I can't remember any, but maybe it's just my ignorance showing. ;)


There have been many. The most recent (unless I'm forgetting some) were against Prime Minister Lionel Jospin and his Education Minister Claude Allègre. That must have been in 1998 or 1999.

There have been many. The most recent (unless I'm forgetting some) were against Prime Minister Lionel Jospin and his Education Minister Claude Allègre. That must have been in 1998 or 1999.

What was the nature of the dispute? Was it because Jospin's plan was too far left? Or not left enough? In other words, were the protesters the same people who would be "out in the street" against Sarkozy? Were they "the usual suspects"?

What was the nature of the dispute? Was it because Jospin's plan was too far left? Or not left enough? In other words, were the protesters the same people who would be "out in the street" against Sarkozy? Were they "the usual suspects"?

It had nothing to do with where Allègre's plans were deemed to be on the political spectrum. He was a pretty average Socialist, left-of-centre, and that was beside the point. The demos were against his reforms of the education system, which were widely unpopular.

Many of the demonstrators were undoubtedly left-wing, if only because left-leaning or left-wing people in France tend to go into protest marches more. (In 2002, there was a massive protest march against the National Front after Le Pen reached the second round of the election: despite the nature of the demo, it was mainly left-wing sympathisers who took part, the right shunning it simply because it was a demo, even though the right was as vocal in criticising Le Pen as the left was. Having said that, farmers are quick to organise demos, and they tend to vote conservative.) In that sense, yes, it was for the most part "the usual suspects".

It had nothing to do with where Allègre's plans were deemed to be on the political spectrum. He was a pretty average Socialist, left-of-centre, and that was beside the point. The demos were against his reforms of the education system, which were widely unpopular.

Many of the demonstrators were undoubtedly left-wing, if only because left-leaning or left-wing people in France tend to go into protest marches more. (In 2002, there was a massive protest march against the National Front after Le Pen reached the second round of the election: despite the nature of the demo, it was mainly left-wing sympathisers who took part, the right shunning it simply because it was a demo, even though the right was as vocal in criticising Le Pen as the left was. Having said that, farmers are quick to organise demos, and they tend to vote conservative.) In that sense, yes, it was for the most part "the usual suspects".

Thanks you. Most enlightening.

The way I see it:

France seems to have gotten a bit too nationalistic. I bet they'd change their policies in a heartbeat if Bush adopted them.

peaceful protests are fine because they show the demonstrators as intelligent adults rather than unruly children. Rioters act like the latter.

peaceful protests are fine because they show the demonstrators as intelligent adults rather than unruly children. Rioters act like the latter.

Riots, done well, can be more effective.

The way I see it:

France seems to have gotten a bit too nationalistic. I bet they'd change their policies in a heartbeat if Bush adopted them.

I very much doubt it. On the contrary, we'd be very proud that the US is adopting the French model.


peaceful protests are fine because they show the demonstrators as intelligent adults rather than unruly children. Rioters act like the latter.

Which is why we do peaceful protests, not riots.

Riots, done well, can be more effective.

Indeed. Nobody in power gives a flying fuck about a group of people, however large, walking down the street with placards in an orderly fashion. Sad, but true.

Indeed. Nobody in power gives a flying fuck about a group of people, however large, walking down the street with placards in an orderly fashion. Sad, but true.

Actually, that's not true. Peaceful protest marches have a history of success in France. The most recent of course being those against de Villepin. We just kept going back down into the streets again and again, and told him we'd keep on doing it until we got what he wanted. There were five main marches (I took part in four of those) and several minor ones, and we had public opinion on our side. It was a battle of wills, and de Villepin was isolated. (Plus, there were other factors. University personnel, myself included, went on strike to support students, and parents were worried that the end of the semester was drawing dangerously close and the strike was still continuing after several weeks. In general, parents and public opinion supported the students, and hence also the uni personnel on strike. Therefore they were looking to the government to end the crisis, putting a lot of pressure on de Villepin.) Eventually we got our way.

Few governments, left-wing or right-wing, have ever been able to push through unpopular reforms in the face of mass public protests here in France. I'd say it's highly effective.

Actually, that's not true. Peaceful protest marches have a history of success in France. The most recent of course being those against de Villepin. We just kept going back down into the streets again and again, and told him we'd keep on doing it until we got what he wanted. There were five main marches (I took part in four of those) and several minor ones, and we had public opinion on our side. It was a battle of wills, and de Villepin was isolated. (Plus, there were other factors. University personnel, myself included, went on strike to support students, and parents were worried that the end of the semester was drawing dangerously close and the strike was still continuing after several weeks. In general, parents and public opinion supported the students, and hence also the uni personnel on strike. Therefore they were looking to the government to end the crisis, putting a lot of pressure on de Villepin.) Eventually we got our way.

Few governments, left-wing or right-wing, have ever been able to push through unpopular reforms in the face of mass public protests here in France. I'd say it's highly effective.

My bad. I should have added "in Anglo-Saxon societies" ;)

I'll be voting for a genuinely left-wing party in the first round, anyway.

Which one?

I would never vote Sarkozy if I was French. I don't think that the people will either.

Opportunistic, treacherous ass.

Which one?

Probably the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire. But I'm not excluding options such as the Parti Communiste Français, or possibly others. I doubt I'll vote for Les Verts, though; they're too disorganised, and there are too many opportunistic right-wingers in their midst.

Probably the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire. But I'm not excluding options such as the Parti Communiste Français, or possibly others. I doubt I'll vote for Les Verts, though; they're too disorganised, and there are too many opportunistic right-wingers in their midst.

The LCR did better in the first round than the PCF last year, so they've got a better, albeit small, chance of making it to the second round.

Better hope Le Pen doesn't get through this time. It'd be very bad for the FN to become the main opposition instead of the Socialists.

The LCR did better in the first round than the PCF last year, so they've got a better, albeit small, chance of making it to the second round.


I didn't know you followed French politics in such detail. ;)

The LCR won't make it anywhere near the second round, unfortunately. The main thing is for them to have at least 5% of the vote. Now, if the "extreme" left were to unify behind a single candidate...


Better hope Le Pen doesn't get through this time. It'd be very bad for the FN to become the main opposition instead of the Socialists.

There's no risk of the FN being considered the main opposition party, simply because the UMP will (hopefully!) refuse to consider them as such. Still, it'll be a relief if the Socialists do reach the second round, yes.

I love it when Europeans get caught up in racist minutiae.

*Returns*

Noone asked you!

And my point was that Corsica was Italian long before France had it. The people there were Italian (probably Northern or Central (yes, there IS a difference)). Napoleon rejected his Italian ethnicity and CLAIMED he was a Frenchman so he could rule them. And rule them he did. He brought France to its imperial height (sort of...it is debatable). After him, France got surrounded and remains so to this day.

I miss Third Republic France. You know, back when they actually did things and mattered.
No country can be a superpower forever.

Teh joke was deleted... but yeah, that is what I meant.

And Corsicans are italians ETHNICALLY. France just owns/owned it.

How is "Bonaparte" French? Nappy there was Italian.
Christ, only 12 posts in and we're already getting to the "cheese eating surrender monkeys" crap?

And, even at that, the language of the French Socialists shows an awful lot of desperation, blatant appeals to nationalism of this kind are what we see the more desperate party in the US use to get last minute votes. It seems like the French Socialists are saying "if it's from those damnable Anglophones it's obviously bad, yadda yadda yadda."

Nationalism in FRANCE? But but I thought Nationalism was BAD (that's one thing they say is bad about America, anyhow.)

Christ, only 12 posts in and we're already getting to the "cheese eating surrender monkeys" crap?

YES

Well, first they have to put up those "Please Speak English" signs everywhere.

And I am sure that the French are happy to speak Arabic to those first and second generation immigrants now living in their country?

And that they have signs in their stores in multiple languages so everyone can understand them?

Do they have government applications printed in multiple languages for, say, driver's licenses and the like?

I didn't know you followed French politics in such detail. ;)

Well, I do live next door :D

The LCR won't make it anywhere near the second round, unfortunately. The main thing is for them to have at least 5% of the vote. Now, if the "extreme" left were to unify behind a single candidate...

The parallels with the British left are depressingly striking...

Nationalism in FRANCE? But but I thought Nationalism was BAD (that's one thing they say is bad about America, anyhow.)


Nationalism is bad, but can you show us where "they" say it's bad about the US?

Nationalism in FRANCE? But but I thought Nationalism was BAD (that's one thing they say is bad about America, anyhow.)
Don't you know anything about France? The French are crazy nationalists.

The parallels with the British left are depressingly striking...

Funny... it's the same thing in the US. Darndest thing...