|
On March 21 2012 08:24 Geiko wrote:Deals were made at right too. Now that they share the same goal, they have the decency to only put forward one candidate and not pollute the political TV scene with candidates that won't even get 5% of votes. Poutou, Joly and Arthaud already got what they wanted from the PS, as did Mélanchon. Now they're just going to use their TV time as free Sarkozy bashing time 
Don't be dishonest. I appreciate your desire to improve the debate by using facts so don't start rambling about what's "decent" or not.
The UMP is simply much more stable than the PS, it's a political elephant. Of course people will gather behind it (apart from extremist nutjobs).
|
I think surveys should be forbidden too. France is actually the country that uses surveys the most in the world. At least they could publish their raw numbers or the method used because they don't all have the same.
One of the method they all use is to shift their results compared to the previous results of the candidate. Since Melenchon's party didn't exist in 2007 they assume he's from the communist party who did 2%. So his scores in surveys appear way lower than his raw score. Also scores like 2.5% make me laugh when you know the actual precision is between 4 and 7%.
About Sarkozy working for the Canard Enchaîne I stopped searching because it's a hassle to find 5 year old news written in a newspaper that doesn't have a website. I don't remember exactly but he had a chronicle and his nickname was something like the traitor. It was also revealed that Hortefeu often gave newspieces to the newspaper.
PS about free bashing time we all remember UMP spent the last 10 years in the government talking about how the 35 hours were an aberration.
|
It's actually not that surprising or shocking. It's just a way to annoy your opponents by divulgating some sensitive information.
|
On March 21 2012 08:15 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:07 Nyarly wrote:That doesn't explains or justify anything, it only means that 66% of frenchmen are racists too, which isn't really surprising. On March 21 2012 07:58 Geiko wrote:There was a also a TL thread about this very problem were I believe most people shared the beliefs of Sarkozy. Of course this is a very delicate subject, I don't really feel like enumerating everything that was said before as that would be way too long, but you can gather arguments for both sides here : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=269692 . My personal opinion is that, the political decisions were the correct response, however, more attention should have been made with the wording used which is what caused most of the upset I think. The ‘Country of Human Rights’ is being accused of fostering racist and xenophobic tendencies by the United Nations. UN is a pretty big deal you know ? They won't say this type of things unless they really mean it. That being said, how can you agree with the political decisions ? Unless you're a racist too, we should know that, it would help understanding your opinions. It's relevant that Nicolas Sarkozy being the president of France does actions that a majority of french people agree on. It's called democracy. Systematically discarding ideas as racist (along with all those who agree with said ideas) isn't really a democratic method. If you wish to discuss more about this subject, please tell me what part of his actions you found racist and were most upset with. The UN were apparently upset with the fact that he named the gypsyies "les roms" and did some generalizations maybe. But regarding the actual decisions, do you disagree with closing the gypsy camps and expulsing romanians without papers out of France ? .
Want to talk about democracy ? From le figaro (since you seem to like it) http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2012/01/23/01016-20120123ARTFIG00694-63-des-francais-favorables-au-mariage-gay.php
63% of the people agree on gay wedding. Sarkozy still don't want it.
Democracy fails a lot of time in france, in fact :
France, Italy, Greece and Slovenia dropped from the category of full
democracies to flawed democracies.
Thanks to sarkozy !
Source : http://graphics.eiu.com/PDF/Democracy_Index_2010_web.pdf
I was upset with all the decision he made and all he said about immigration, foreign people and french nationality.
Hortefeux was judged guilty two times in 6 months for racist speech. Isn't that enough to upset you ?
And i'm not going to talk about guéant since he mysteriously got cleaned for what he said.
I'm an anarchist and moreoever a humanist, of course i disagree with closing camps and explusing romanians. How I as a human should be allowed to live in this part of the earth while another human just like me couldn't ? If you can explain this to me while not being racist, i'd like to hear that. Keep in mind that all men are equals.
But my opinion on the subjet doesn't really matter since i'm also against the idea of countries and bounderies.
All i want is for you to explain me why should we agree to have a racist president or atleast how can you explain he isn't.
Btw about the camps did you know that cities of more than 5000 population MUST provide a place for them ? It's a law.
Source : http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000583573
But of course almost every city doesn't care about it.
And you might haven't fully read that article about UN, since you're french i'll quote it in french :
Les experts du CERD (Comité des Nations Unies pour l'élimination de la discrimination raciale) ont dénoncé une recrudescence des actes racistes en France.
It blames the acts, not the words used.
|
On March 21 2012 08:35 chuky500 wrote:
About Sarkozy working for the Canard Enchaîne I stopped searched because it's a hassle to find 5 year old news written in a newspaper that doesn't have a website. I don't remember exactly but he had a chronicle and his nickname was something like the traitor. It was also revealed that Hortefeu often gave newspieces to the newspaper.
Can't really comment on something I've never heard of before, and for which you provide no sources.
On March 21 2012 08:35 chuky500 wrote:
PS about free bashing time we all remember UMP spent the last 10 years in the government talking about how the 35 hours were an aberration.
To be fair, a certain number of PS members were also bashing the 35h during this time period (Valls and DSK for example), and I don't think anyone currently in the PS still supports this idea openly (I might be wrong here, don't quote me on this ^^)
|
As an external observer, I would find extremely funny if Marine Le Pen or Jean-Luc Mélenchon is elected president and if they follow all their program. Not funny for the french people of course^^
The problem with Bayrou is that he lacks charisma, he is not able to harangue crowds. I like a lot of his ideas, especially the pro-EU spirit. Hated when he hit the little kid tho.
Sarkozy did great job as president of the european union. I can understand the hate toward the man, more than toward the politician by the french people but I don't think Hollande would do much better, he is not a DSK.
|
Sarkozy has always been very clear about this point, he is in favor of gay union (pax) with the same economic advantages as regular couples, but is against adoption. Marriage in france gives access to adoption, so being against adoption from homosexual parents is being against mariage.
When it comes to homosexual adoption, French people are still divided (51% vs 49% in latest IFOP poll : http://www.rmc.fr/editorial/234197/1-francais-sur-2-pour-l-adoption-homoparentale/ ) and I don't find Sarkozy's position unreasonable in that regard.
Excuse me but what the hell is the "Economist Intelligence Unit" and what legitimity do these people have to judge the quality of a democracy ? From what I saw of the link you provided, they have very subjective criterias involved and an unclear methodology on how they obtain their results.
On March 21 2012 08:40 Nyarly wrote:
I was upset with all the decision he made and all he said about immigration, foreign people and french nationality.
Hortefeux was judged guilty two times in 6 months for racist speech. Isn't that enough to upset you ?
And i'm not going to talk about guéant since he mysteriously got cleaned for what he said.
There are several notable politician from the PS who were also condemned for racist speeches. i won't get into that game of discussing individual cases, surely you agree that one person in a party does not represent the ideas for all the party itself...
On March 21 2012 08:40 Nyarly wrote:
I'm an anarchist and moreoever a humanist, of course i disagree with closing camps and explusing romanians. How I as a human should be allowed to live in this part of the earth while another human just like me couldn't ? If you can explain this to me while not being racist, i'd like to hear that. Keep in mind that all men are equals.
It's called nationality. If you don't have a valid passport or visa card, you are not welcome in our country. If you disagree with that based on your ideological beliefs, than, we can just agree to disagree.
On March 21 2012 08:40 Nyarly wrote:But my opinion on the subjet doesn't really matter since i'm also against the idea of countries and bounderies. All i want is for you to explain me why should we agree to have a racist president or atleast how can you explain he isn't. Btw about the camps did you know that cities of more than 5000 population MUST provide a place for them ? It's a law. Source : http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000583573But of course almost every city doesn't care about it.
You still haven't told me how Sarkozy has been racist so I can't answer that question... You've stated that Hortefeux might be racist. That the UN might have been displeased with the overall rise of racist and xenophobic sentiments in France. But i see no proof of Sarkozy himself being racist. That's a pretty violent accusation to make, surely it would be good if you could back it up with concrete facts.
Regarding the obligation for communes to have camps for Roms, you might have misunderstood the text. It said obligation for them to be part of a regional plan for providing an area to the Roms based on demand.
In reality, such camps do exist, the problem is that the Roms never use them (because they are far from the cities and other reasons maybe) and prefer to set camp in public parking lots where they have no right to be. This was the problem that was discussed 2 years ago.
|
What a constructive post...
I know this is going nowhere but I can't help answerring. Am I a bad person ?
-What's so bad about Hadopi ?
It solved nothing. As shown when megaupload went down people had already moved to other download solutions. The government licensed a private company to spy on the internet (did they just kill internet neutrality for a few million dollars ? T_T) and created some new fancy offense (bad sucurity of your own internet access ? really ?) when a global licence with some innovative ideas (creation of a free public service in order to record and broadcast music) would have been something amazing. But this government is stubborn with old ideas and I don't really want to create a new Hadopi debate here.
-Karachi, Bettancourt-Worth are pending affairs, there are absolutely no proofs of anything against Sarkozy at the moment.
Concerning the Bettancourt affair, I never said there was a link with Sarkozy other than the fact that he was a minister of the "irreproachable republic". And concerning the Karachigate we can only hope that light will be made upon those bad rumors. And the only way for Sarkozy to testify is to lose his presidential immunity. I will do my best there.
-Khadafi funded campaign is a rumor with only one source: Kadhafi's son. If you believe that well... can't do anything for you.
This is not Kadafhi's son and I don't expect you to do anything for me, thanks : )
Everyone believes what he wants to believe. The low-level commentaries from governement members certainly did not help to improve the image of Romani people in the french population. And the answer from Sarkozy to the Luxembourg representative was disgusting.
-The Fiscal Shield was a promised reform from the 2007 campaign. If he hadn't done it you would have said that he doesn't respect his promises. He recently went back on it following the financial crisis though. For information, even Hollande has a Fiscal Shield in his program.
Should I thank the crisis for the removal of the that shield ? And the fiscal shield Hollande talked about is not really at the same rate. I am not praising Hollande's program though.
-Purchasing Power has actually gone up in France during the 5 last years (source OCDE stats). This is far from being the case for all the European countries through the crisis.
I am sure Sarkozy let a few people increase their purchasing power. But if it is only due to an increase in inequalities, you must realize that it won't satisfy me.
-Sarkozy respected his engagements with regards to immigration. Immigration is now controlled at about 200 000 persons per year (a figure that was deemed too high by socialists Hollande and Mélanchon).
And 5 years after his election we have stories such as people with high school diploma who are forced back into their countries ? Or battered women beeing threatened with deportation because she dared asking for divorce ? ♪ Maaad world... ♪
-Regarding the rise of unemployment, France is one of the countries in Europe with the least increase in unemployment. Figures vary regarding what type of calculation is used, however, in all cases France is among the top 5 countries in Europe in this regard.
Didn't you listen to Sarkozy in 2007 ? We have reached full employment in France by now. Oh, I know, it is because of the crisis. And what measures did Sarkozy take to prevent the next one ? Are crisis some kind of earthquake that you can neither forsee nor prevent ? Such an acknowledgment of failure !
-It is debatable whether VAT for restaurants is a good or bad thing. Personally, I find it better than an increase in taxes.
There were supposed to be counterparties. What did Sarkozy do to make sure they would be fulfilled ?
-National Identity debate was a debate that was asked by a majority of Frenchmen in 2007. It has lead to criteria for obtaining the French nationality (language tests, culture minimums etc...).
I missed the referundum on the necessity of this debate. Those criteria would have been inforced anyway and are completely stupid (not sure if 50% of the french population would pass these test)
-Sarkozy increased his salary 172% to put it as high as that of the Prime Minister (18500€ / month) For reference, François Hollande and Segolene Royal's salary are above 30 000€ / month while they have minimal electoral tasks (president of region and president of department).
Great. For reference, compared to the former president, the new salary represents 272% of the previous one.
-EPAD is a non event. Jean Sarkozy was elected by the people and had every legal right to apply for that job. In the end he didn't even present himself so no harm done.
The election is a panel of very few person amongst whom the majority would not have taken the risk to displease the president. No harm was done thanks to the vigilance of some newspapers
-The Bernard Tapie case was a mistake by the Justice system that cost a successful business man a good number of years of his life. Compensation was decided by a court.
It was no usual court, it was a special court after decision by Christine Lagarde. I really wish I could link you the canard enchainé on that topic.
-Khadafi: what humiliation are you talking about ?
The fact that Khadafi came to Paris and clearly deny Sarokzy's claims about the fact that human rights were discussed during their meeting for example.
-The Lisbone treaty position was decided commonly by UMP and PS (lead by François Hollande). The 2005 "no" by referundum has been analyzed by all to be a "no" to Chirac's government more than a "no" to the European preconstitution text proposed.
Again, I am no Hollande supporter. I can only witness that it is very convenient to "analyze" the answer of a question when you give 2 blur options, yes and no.
-What lies about "paradis fiscaux" ? During Sarkozy's quinquénat, most notably switzerland had to give a lot of ground on their "bank secret" to avoid being classified as a "paradis fiscal".
Don't laugh too hard...
-"End of reimbursment for dozens of drugs
Medical deductibles" Care to elaborate ?
Not sure about the translation in english. I meant "franchises médicales" which again is a tax that will make ill people pay.
-Illegal migrant hunt (especially children) ????
A children in a detention center when his "crime" is to be on the wrong part of the planet is something I would prefer not to exist.
-There were some potentially offensive sentences that were pronounced by one of the ministers indeed.
You phrase it better than I do.
-Al Assad friendship. Elaborate please.
Discussing human rights between friends
-Regarding nominations, François Holland has promised much worse as he said he would place only people from his political party at key places of power (prefects, conseil constitutionel, cours des comptes etc...). Sarkozy was the one to make a government composed partly of members of the opposition, he nominated a Socialist man head of the cours des comptes, and pushed DSK's candidacy at the head of the FMI.
The system of the "copinage" is more present for Socialist people to be honest.
It is awesome at how the sarkozist are crying with the "purge" word when Sarkozy used his 5 years to put personal relationships everywhere. Hollande should not have said that he would replace them, but it has to be done indeed. And I would not call Eric Besson a member of the opposition.
What you can remember of Sarkozy's mandat for example:
-The retirement reforms. Holland's program is to do exactly the same as Sarkozy, except raise the age limit to work before 19 instead of 18 for the right to retire at 60 and except maybe 2 or 3 detail points.
Before Sarkozy everyone could retire at 60. I do not see any improvement here. Nothing was done towards women who are statistically more likely to have children.
-The higher education reform with the LRU that we talked about before
Not seeing much improvement there either. And I certainly do hope this is not the start of some privatisation of high school sector. Anything but the money elitist anglo-saxon model.
-Reduction in public debt with the 1/2 civil servant politic (that françois hollande will continue to use)
You do not understand my mindset, do you ?
Edit : I feel bad for geiko. He cannot physically answer all the questions in this thread ! Or can he ?
|
Russian Federation112 Posts
On March 21 2012 08:33 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:28 EdouarKiLL wrote:On March 21 2012 08:24 Geiko wrote:On March 21 2012 08:18 EdouarKiLL wrote:
Geiko what is you position (oops i mean the position of ump) about oil peak plz ? =) I don't like it. It's getting more and more expensive to drive to work everyday :'( (my answer is as precise as your question is) Your answer is awesome man, dont worry Let me decipher my previous message for you: I wanted you to elaborate on what particular issue you were talking about ("thoughts on oil prices ?" seems a bit vague to answer) and how relevant it was with regards to French national elections (I'm guessing you have some sort of grief against Sarkozy for something he might have done regarding oil prices ?)
Peak oil oil is not "oil prices" the fact that you dont even know what is it is prooving the high level of curiosity you have. I was wondering what are the positions of ump on this issue.
And i was also asking you what are for you the mains issues concerning france and the world nowaydays?
PS: i am not freely bashing sarkozy as i think did sincerely he thought that where right, the problem is that he were wrong =(
|
On March 21 2012 08:30 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:20 Boblion wrote:
So basicly you say that i'm wrong but you can't explain why and you are just saying "that there is a bigger issue" and then you give some random examples from the past (when mass medias didn't exist lol). You have obviously no idea about the concept of terrorism. Just take a look at a world map and look where terrorist attacks happen and what are the ideological reasons behind it. Yup, I say that you're wrong but that I won't have the arrogance to explain terrorism by "magnets lol". Terrorists have struck pretty much everywhere. Action Directe in France, MIR in Chile, AQMI in the Makhreb, Ku Klux Klan in the US... note that not all of those focus on cultural clashes.
Terrorism is a clash of ideologies. Ideologies are cultures. You can't have terrorism if everyone share the same values and culture. Not too hard to understand eh ? Well that's how all the terrorists think. It is all about imposing your ideas.
I will let you babble about the political meaning of Action Directe and MIR, or the epic struggle of AQMI against poverty and Western imperialism.
edit: Just to be clear i don't want to share the same values and culture with everyone, that would make me dumb and boring lol. I have few values to share anyway, maybe that's why i'm not a terrorist 
|
On March 21 2012 09:04 EdouarKiLL wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:33 Geiko wrote:On March 21 2012 08:28 EdouarKiLL wrote:On March 21 2012 08:24 Geiko wrote:On March 21 2012 08:18 EdouarKiLL wrote:
Geiko what is you position (oops i mean the position of ump) about oil peak plz ? =) I don't like it. It's getting more and more expensive to drive to work everyday :'( (my answer is as precise as your question is) Your answer is awesome man, dont worry Let me decipher my previous message for you: I wanted you to elaborate on what particular issue you were talking about ("thoughts on oil prices ?" seems a bit vague to answer) and how relevant it was with regards to French national elections (I'm guessing you have some sort of grief against Sarkozy for something he might have done regarding oil prices ?) Peak oil oil is not "oil prices" the fact that you dont even know what is it is prooving the high level of curiosity you have. I was wondering what are the positions of ump on this issue. And i was also asking you what are for you the mains issues concerning france and the world nowaydays? PS: i am not freely bashing sarkozy as i think did sincerely he thought that where right, the problem is that he were wrong =(
Lol, please don't attack me on the fact that I mistook an english word for another, I believe neither of us are perfectly fluent
I have no clue what UMP's stance on this issue is. I can tell you my own stance if you want, but this thread wouldn't be the proper place for this
If you narrow it down to more precise questions, like maybe alternative energy sources, renewables, etc... maybe we can have an interesting discussion on this matter.
For me, international politics are France's lesser concerns at the moment and I'd much rather talk about Internal politics. Of course, any discussion regarding France's role in Europe is also welcome.
@VyingsP I'm terribly sorry but I'm afraid I have to go to bed now. I will answer to all your points tomorrow when I find the time.
|
On March 21 2012 09:00 Geiko wrote:Sarkozy has always been very clear about this point, he is in favor of gay union (pax) with the same economic advantages as regular couples, but is against adoption. Marriage in france gives access to adoption, so being against adoption from homosexual parents is being against mariage. When it comes to homosexual adoption, French people are still divided (51% vs 49% in latest IFOP poll : http://www.rmc.fr/editorial/234197/1-francais-sur-2-pour-l-adoption-homoparentale/ ) and I don't find Sarkozy's position unreasonable in that regard.
51% is still a majority and it wasn't even on the same subject. So why with a majority of people who agree for gay marriage (and homosexual adoption as you stated) and france being a democracy there is still nothing to legalize it ?
On March 21 2012 09:00 Geiko wrote:Excuse me but what the hell is the "Economist Intelligence Unit" and what legitimity do these people have to judge the quality of a democracy ? From what I saw of the link you provided, they have very subjective criterias involved and an unclear methodology on how they obtain their results.
Let me google that for you : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economist_Intelligence_Unit
Are you really telling me that you read that whole thing, checked every data and determined that it was bullshit ?
I think theses guy have a lot more knowledge than you and me about what they're talking about and they are big enough to be taken seriously by a lot of people and media sources.
On March 21 2012 09:00 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:40 Nyarly wrote:
I was upset with all the decision he made and all he said about immigration, foreign people and french nationality.
Hortefeux was judged guilty two times in 6 months for racist speech. Isn't that enough to upset you ?
And i'm not going to talk about guéant since he mysteriously got cleaned for what he said.
There are several notable politician from the PS who were also condemned for racist speeches. i won't get into that game of discussing individual cases, surely you agree that one person in a party does not represent the ideas for all the party itself...
I never said that PS politicians were perfect, a lot of them aren't.
But hortefeux was in the government when he said his things. Being in the goverment, he represents our whole country, the president and his party. So it's perfectly valid to say that they are all racists. By the way, sarkozy never condamned hortefeux for what he said, instead, he kept him in the governement even after being found guilty.
On March 21 2012 09:00 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:40 Nyarly wrote:
I'm an anarchist and moreoever a humanist, of course i disagree with closing camps and explusing romanians. How I as a human should be allowed to live in this part of the earth while another human just like me couldn't ? If you can explain this to me while not being racist, i'd like to hear that. Keep in mind that all men are equals.
It's called nationality. If you don't have a valid passport or visa card, you are not welcome in our country. If you disagree with that based on your ideological beliefs, than, we can just agree to disagree.
What is nationality at the human scale ? Yes i think we can just agree to disagree but as i said, my opinion on the subjet really doesn't matter at it was not what i asked you to answer.
On March 21 2012 09:00 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 08:40 Nyarly wrote:But my opinion on the subjet doesn't really matter since i'm also against the idea of countries and bounderies. All i want is for you to explain me why should we agree to have a racist president or atleast how can you explain he isn't. Btw about the camps did you know that cities of more than 5000 population MUST provide a place for them ? It's a law. Source : http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000583573But of course almost every city doesn't care about it. You still haven't told me how Sarkozy has been racist so I can't answer that question... You've stated that Hortefeux might be racist. That the UN might have been displeased with the overall rise of racist and xenophobic sentiments in France. But i see no proof of Sarkozy himself being racist. That's a pretty violent accusation to make, surely it would be good if you could back it up with concrete facts.
I didn't say that hortefeux might be racist i said that he was found GUILTY of racist speech.
UN WERE worried about the rise of racist and xenophobic feelings in france. Stop saying might when i throw facts with valid sources at you.
About sarkozy want more facts ?
Nicolas Sarkozy pour son discours de Dakar ! « Le drame de l'Afrique, c'est que l'homme africain n'est pas assez entré dans l'histoire. (...) Le problème de l'Afrique, c'est qu'elle vit trop le présent dans la nostalgie du paradis perdu de l'enfance. (...) Dans cet imaginaire où tout recommence toujours, il n'y a de place ni pour l'aventure humaine, ni pour l'idée de progrès » , déclarait le président français dans cette adresse à la jeunesse africaine
[...]
Dire que les Africains ne sont pas entrés dans l'histoire est un stéréotype fondateur des discours racistes » des XVIIe, XVIIIe et XIXe siècle a tranché Doudou Diène à la tribune des Nations unies. Il a témoigné de la « blessure profonde » causée par le discours de Dakar chez les intellectuels africains. Et pour enfoncer le clou, ce juriste sénégalais, nommé expert indépendant sur le racisme en 2002 par la défunte Commission des droits de l'homme de l'ONU, a dénoncé l'utilisation des tests ADN pour le regroupement familial, qui contribue selon lui à la « stigmatisation de l'immigré » .
From : http://www.rue89.com/2007/11/09/onu-sarkozy-accuse-de-legitimer-intellectuellement-le-racisme
And DiverCités actually lodge a complaint for this. Source : http://www.alterinfo.net/PLAINTE-CONTRE-SARKOZY-ACTION-EN-JUSTICE-PROPOS-RACISTES-DU-PRESIDENT-SARKOZY-A-DAKAR_a10896.html
On March 21 2012 09:00 Geiko wrote:
Regarding the obligation for communes to have camps for Roms, you might have misunderstood the text. It said obligation for them to be part of a regional plan for providing an area to the Roms based on demand.
In reality, such camps do exist, the problem is that the Roms never use them (because they are far from the cities and other reasons maybe) and prefer to set camp in public parking lots where they have no right to be. This was the problem that was discussed 2 years ago.
What i said, they don't care about the law. The camps they build are always far from everything, most of the time without electricity nor toilets. Would you live like that ? I don't think so, that's why they go elsewhere.
|
On March 21 2012 09:19 Boblion wrote:Terrorism is a clash of ideologies. Ideologies are cultures. You can't have terrorism if everyone share the same values and culture. Not too hard to understand eh ? Well that's how all the terrorists think. It is all about imposing your ideas. I will let you babble about the political meaning of Action Directe and MIR, or the epic struggle of AQMI against poverty and Western imperialism. edit: Just to be clear i don't want to share the same values and culture with everyone, that would make me dumb and boring lol. I have few values to share anyway, maybe that's why i'm not a terrorist
Uh, so cultures = ideologies = values = ideas = bananas I guess...?
Well that's how all the terrorists think.
Watch out, we have a mentalist right here.
|
Good read for the OP.
On March 20 2012 02:25 Koorb wrote:
Then, on April 22nd, the first round will take place by universal suffrage (one citizen, one vote), and the two candidates who earned the most votes will proceed to the second round. The latter will take place on May 6th, and of course will decide who gets to rule the country for the five next years.
You mention universal suffrage on the first voting round; is the second round different?
Also, I wouldn't mind more information on Le Pen. You didn't talk about her economics at all, so I'd be interested in reading about that. From what little I've read, most European 'far-right' parties aren't like the 'American right-wing,' economically speaking. Here, far-right usually implies lassiez-faire or limited government intervention and rollbacks on welfare, while their European counterparts seem to be more fiscally liberal and pro-welfare state, almost economically fascistic from my understanding. Is this correct?
|
Yes, here the far-right is closer to the people and defends a traditionalist model of government. In the US, it's mostly a bunch of scarecrows who speak about christian values and gun ownership while the government robs the country blind.
You won't find much seriousness in Le Pen's economical plan. It's not really her focus, and most of her followers wouldn't understand / don't really care.
|
On March 21 2012 09:46 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 09:19 Boblion wrote:Terrorism is a clash of ideologies. Ideologies are cultures. You can't have terrorism if everyone share the same values and culture. Not too hard to understand eh ? Well that's how all the terrorists think. It is all about imposing your ideas. I will let you babble about the political meaning of Action Directe and MIR, or the epic struggle of AQMI against poverty and Western imperialism. edit: Just to be clear i don't want to share the same values and culture with everyone, that would make me dumb and boring lol. I have few values to share anyway, maybe that's why i'm not a terrorist Uh, so cultures = ideologies = values = ideas = bananas I guess...?
You should read some Geertz.
On March 21 2012 09:46 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2012 09:19 Boblion wrote:Well that's how all the terrorists think. Watch out, we have a mentalist right here.
You have a better explanation of their motivations than "imposing your ideas" ?
|
On March 21 2012 09:57 Kukaracha wrote:
Yes, here the far-right is closer to the people and defends a traditionalist model of government. In the US, it's mostly a bunch of scarecrows who speak about christian values and gun ownership while the government robs the country blind.
You won't find much seriousness in Le Pen's economical plan. It's not really her focus, and most of her followers wouldn't understand / don't really care.
I think that the scarecrows have more of an agenda for personal gain in the US. Maybe in other countries the right wing is different, but then again I live in the US.
Also, I agree, Le Pen doesn't seem very economically focused, but at the moment it doesn't seem like a necessary factor in becoming a major electoral force.
|
On March 21 2012 10:33 Boblion wrote:
[You should read some Geertz.
You should read him too. You can't take his point of view and speak of cultural clashes when, according to Geertz analysis, the opponents have an identical set of values for the most part. If your definition is as broad as his, then how can you speak of multicultural issues?
On March 21 2012 09:46 Kukaracha wrote:
You have a better explanation of their motivations than "imposing your ideas" ?
Isn't every conflict about imposting your will upon another group?
There was a much smarter and accurate explanation earlier in this thread. Terrorism is, along with guerilla warfare, the only type of war a vastly outpowered group can wage. As for what terrorists think, I have no idea, but I'm sure they think about a myriad of different things, from chicken sandwiches to wooden chairs.
|
On March 21 2012 07:01 Geiko wrote:What a constructive post... -What's so bad about Hadopi ? -Karachi, Bettancourt-Worth are pending affairs, there are absolutely no proofs of anything against Sarkozy at the moment. -Khadafi funded campaign is a rumor with only one source: Kadhafi's son. If you believe that well... can't do anything for you. -Regarding Romani people debate, it would seem that 2/3 frenchmen agree with Sarkozy's politics, you are in the minority here (source: http://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/2010/08/26/01002-20100826ARTFIG00567-roms-deux-francais-sur-trois-approuvent-le-gouvernement.php ) -The Fiscal Shield was a promised reform from the 2007 campaign. If he hadn't done it you would have said that he doesn't respect his promises. He recently went back on it following the financial crisis though. For information, even Hollande has a Fiscal Shield in his program. -Purchasing Power has actually gone up in France during the 5 last years (source OCDE stats). This is far from being the case for all the European countries through the crisis. -Sarkozy respected his engagements with regards to immigration. Immigration is now controlled at about 200 000 persons per year (a figure that was deemed too high by socialists Hollande and Mélanchon). -Regarding the rise of unemployment, France is one of the countries in Europe with the least increase in unemployment. Figures vary regarding what type of calculation is used, however, in all cases France is among the top 5 countries in Europe in this regard. -It is debatable whether VAT for restaurants is a good or bad thing. Personally, I find it better than an increase in taxes. -National Identity debate was a debate that was asked by a majority of Frenchmen in 2007. It has lead to criteria for obtaining the French nationality (language tests, culture minimums etc...). -Sarkozy increased his salary 172% to put it as high as that of the Prime Minister (18500€ / month) For reference, François Hollande and Segolene Royal's salary are above 30 000€ / month while they have minimal electoral tasks (president of region and president of department). -EPAD is a non event. Jean Sarkozy was elected by the people and had every legal right to apply for that job. In the end he didn't even present himself so no harm done. -The Bernard Tapie case was a mistake by the Justice system that cost a successful business man a good number of years of his life. Compensation was decided by a court. -Khadafi: what humiliation are you talking about ? -The Lisbone treaty position was decided commonly by UMP and PS (lead by François Hollande). The 2005 "no" by referundum has been analyzed by all to be a "no" to Chirac's government more than a "no" to the European preconstitution text proposed. -What lies about "paradis fiscaux" ? During Sarkozy's quinquénat, most notably switzerland had to give a lot of ground on their "bank secret" to avoid being classified as a "paradis fiscal". -"End of reimbursment for dozens of drugs Medical deductibles" Care to elaborate ? -Illegal migrant hunt (especially children) ???? -There were some potentially offensive sentences that were pronounced by one of the ministers indeed. -Al Assad friendship. Elaborate please. -Regarding nominations, François Holland has promised much worse as he said he would place only people from his political party at key places of power (prefects, conseil constitutionel, cours des comptes etc...). Sarkozy was the one to make a government composed partly of members of the opposition, he nominated a Socialist man head of the cours des comptes, and pushed DSK's candidacy at the head of the FMI. The system of the "copinage" is more present for Socialist people to be honest. What you can remember of Sarkozy's mandat for example: -The retirement reforms. Holland's program is to do exactly the same as Sarkozy, except raise the age limit to work before 19 instead of 18 for the right to retire at 60 and except maybe 2 or 3 detail points. -The higher education reform with the LRU that we talked about before -Reduction in public debt with the 1/2 civil servant politic (that françois hollande will continue to use)
I seriously hope you do not genuinely believe what you write. Some of your points are laughable and even embarrassing. This is harsh, but "what is wrong with Hadopi?", "EPAD is a non event." Really? Those are major events that show how corrupted this government was and is, and how it treats the political sphere like a business where you have to help friends and make money.
The last meetings continue to prove Sarkozy still lies openly and without any shame, taking Frenchmen for gullible imbeciles (eg the referendums, as if people forgot the last time a referendum happened, it has been "oh, you didn't answer right, whelp, never mind, we'll just ignore it") , posing as some kind of alone-versus-the-bad-guys hero (cf Marseille) and fishing in the far right with disgusting propositions.
Also, saying "PS doesn't do better" is not an argument, the PS is as much of a joke and an embarrassment to France as the UPM and no one should accept this kind of politics where sensationalism and depthless debates are key words.
|
On March 21 2012 11:05 Kukaracha wrote:You should read him too. You can't take his point of view and speak of cultural clashes when, according to Geertz analysis, the opponents have an identical set of values for the most part. If your definition is as broad as his, then how can you speak of multicultural issues?
I doubt that someone like Breivik have the same set of values than us but w/e. So let's get it straight once for all, i have never talked about "multicultural issues" (read my posts) all i have said (like Le Pen) is that multiculturalism creates people like Breivik. (he wrote a whole book about his hatred of Islam ffs). Now obviously it doesn't mean that everyone will become a terrorist but things like that are bound to happen with xenophobic people. You can blame the FN for fueling xenophobia, i don't really care. Again i'm not for or against multiculturalism i don't think it is a reversible process anyway (at least until a major disaster).
On March 21 2012 09:46 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +
You have a better explanation of their motivations than "imposing your ideas" ?
Isn't every conflict about imposting your will upon another group?
You get it ! The rest is mere details and it will never explain the motivation of the terrorist, you are only describing his means.
wiki: Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or, ideological goal
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
