|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
1) The legitimate debate about the UE and the euro is completely polluted by the FN, which turns anything it touches to dirt.
2) The majority of the French people expresses mild to strong "euroskepticism" (~55% of the votes in the first round of the presidential), mostly about the way it works (and its economically liberal nature), and not its very existence.
3) Only the FN more or less aims at a Frexit (neither Mélenchon nor Dupont-Aignan directly ask for it; in his second round deal with Le Pen, Dupont-Aignan even obtained that "leaving the euro would not be a prerequisite" + Show Spoiler +he wanted to leave the euro in his 2012 program but dropped it since then
4) As of now, the sovereignist right and the far-right electorates are the ones who would be the most OK with leaving the UE. Rest refuses it, or it's simply not their first choice:
+ Show Spoiler +![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/glCaRA4.jpg) If it was announced tomorrow that the European Union is abandoned, would you experience... ... deep regret (red) ... indifference (yellow) ... strong relief (blue) EXG = far-left FI/PCF = radical left EELV/PS = left EM/Modem = center/center-right UDI = center-right LR = liberal-conservatives DLF = sovereignist right FN = far-right No party
Attachment to the EU is the strongest near the centre (hence why, for instance, we hear only praises in this thread). EELV/PS are open or disguised eurofederalists (it's basically their utopia since they dropped socialism) while the radical left is more and more abandoning this idea. The centre is eurofederalist too. (Social-democracy + Christian democracy are the two families which are the most attached to their creation.) The sovereignist right and the far-right clearly choose France over the UE.
If you were to ask frankly and directly about eurofederalism to the French people, I think only 15-20% would vote for it.
If a major shock happened to France the way it happened in Greece, and the population was given the opportunity to choose, I think France would leave (or rather, refuse to make heavy sacrifices to stay, because that's most likely how the question would be formulated).
|
On June 13 2017 19:08 TheDwf wrote:1) The legitimate debate about the UE and the euro is completely polluted by the FN, which turns anything it touches to dirt. 2) The majority of the French people expresses mild to strong "euroskepticism" (~55% of the votes in the first round of the presidential), mostly about the way it works (and its economically liberal nature), and not its very existence. 3) Only the FN more or less aims at a Frexit (neither Mélenchon nor Dupont-Aignan directly ask for it; in his second round deal with Le Pen, Dupont-Aignan even obtained that "leaving the euro would not be a prerequisite" + Show Spoiler +he wanted to leave the euro in his 2012 program but dropped it since then ). And I have doubts about the FN being sincere on that point, but it's hard to tell since the party is a mess with different contradictory lines. 4) As of now, the sovereignist right and the far-right electorates are the ones who would be the most OK with leaving the UE. Rest refuses it, or it's simply not their first choice: + Show Spoiler +If it was announced tomorrow that the European Union is abandoned, would you experience... ... deep regret (red) ... indifference (yellow) ... strong relief (blue) EXG = far-left FI/PCF = radical left EELV/PS = left EM/Modem = center/center-right UDI = center-right LR = liberal-conservatives DLF = sovereignist right FN = far-right No party Attachment to the EU is the strongest near the centre (hence why, for instance, we hear only praises in this thread). EELV/PS are open or disguised eurofederalists (it's basically their utopia since they dropped socialism) while the radical left is more and more abandoning this idea. The centre is eurofederalist too. (Social-democracy + Christian democracy are the two families which are the most attached to their creation.) The sovereignist right and the far-right clearly choose France over the UE. If you were to ask frankly and directly about eurofederalism to the French people, I think only 15-20% would vote for it. If a major shock happened to France the way it happened in Greece, and the population was given the opportunity to choose, I think France would leave (or rather, refuse to make heavy sacrifices to stay, because that's most likely how the question would be formulated).
To be honest, if Texas went through what happened to Greece and had to make the same sacrifices or leave the US, I wouldn't bet on them staying.
That being said I agree with everything you wrote. I would add that :
1- A lot of things in the EU are disfunctional and basically everyone in the French political body agrees it needs reform, even though no one really knows where to start.
2- A lot of things, starting with the euro were probably a bad idea to start with, but the economic and political cost of leaving dwarfs the cost of staying. You can dislike something and REALLY hope it doesn't collapse (that would be my take of american democracy - I think it's completely fucked, but Jesus, I hope it doesn't end in my lifetime).
3- People still recognize the EU as a historical, long term project that is meant to end centuries of divisions, war and hostility between european nations.
4- Euroskepticism is a vague term. Does one mean the EU project as a whole or the EU as it is now? Because if we talk of the Europe as it is now, I am a euroskeptic, even though I am hugely attached to its existence, its project and the values it represents.
|
Texas' relationship with the US is not similar enough to Greece's relationship with the EU to warrant a comparison, but your point stands relative to the EU's treatment of its less influential members.
|
On June 13 2017 19:41 farvacola wrote:
Texas' relationship with the US is not similar enough to Greece's relationship with the EU to warrant a comparison, but your point stands relative to the EU's treatment of its less influential members.
My point really is that the situation in Greece is and has been so dramatic that everything is on the table and that would be valid for any country. The chances that France goes through something like that in a foreseeable future are basically 0, and I wouldn't bet on any institution in any country surviving such a catastrophe. I'm well aware that the situation of american states is extremely different from the situation of EU membres 
|
To that point, I would guess that plenty of French folk are paying attention to what's happening in the UK and will use that as a lesson in moderation should a sudden Frexit movement gain traction.
|
"what's happening in the UK" as though our country has fallen apart. Nothing spectacular has happened in the UK.
|
Wait, wat.
How's the recent election not a spectacular failure of the conservatives?
|
One needn't infer anything remotely as bad as the UK falling apart in order to look at what's shaken out during the months following Brexit and say "no thanks." The uncertainty alone would do it.
|
What actually happened: the conservatives managed to win their largest vote share since the 1980s without offering a single policy that anybody liked except Brexit while the opposition offered everything under the sun including 4 more holidays. It's a huge failure on their part because they would have won by a much larger margin if their campaign wasn't so incompetent, but it has very little if anything to do with Brexit. The opposition party were also clear about carrying out Brexit and no free movement, etc.
|
Regardless of the fact as to whether or not the recent UK elections relate back to Brexit, observers throughout the world are going to associate them with one another no matter what.
|
Yes, so I've noticed, which is why I'm trying to correct the misinterpretation.
|
You still haven't really explained why or how one can evaluate a political event as unusual as May's flipped vote without taking into account a similarly unusual event that seems to inform a great deal of that which goes into UK politics, namely Brexit and its continued consequences. You're suggesting that May's flipped vote is incompetence in politics as usual, but in doing so, you're arguing that conservative incompetence during the lead-up to the vote had nothing to do with Brexit. This would be like saying that Theresa May's ascendence had nothing to do with Brexit. While potentially arguable in a highly abstract sense, both of these lines require a compartmentalization that doesn't make any intuitive sense.
|
On June 13 2017 20:05 bardtown wrote:
What actually happened: the conservatives managed to win their largest vote share since the 1980s without offering a single policy that anybody liked except Brexit while the opposition offered everything under the sun including 4 more holidays. It's a huge failure on their part because they would have won by a much larger margin if their campaign wasn't so incompetent, but it has very little if anything to do with Brexit. The opposition party were also clear about carrying out Brexit and no free movement, etc.
That sugarcoats it a little bit.
While conservatives do have a bigger share, labour closed the gap in comparison to 2015 by more than 60%.
Them not gaining seats for that is a great feat of the election system.
Saying they won with that is on the same level as proclaiming Hillary POTUS.
|
Neither of you are making sense. Both parties gained votes. Labour did not win because they closed the gap a little. They improved, primarily because the Tory campaign was atrocious, but they lost. Also, to say Brexit is down to Tory incompetence is to ignore the fact that the majority of the Tory party are in favour. It's the second time that a Tory prime minister has taken a public vote for granted, and they need to learn, but Brexit didn't cause their mistakes.
|
bardtown misses the point, yet again, that UK hasn't left the EU yet. As of now we are still have 99.9% of the benefits of the EU. The 0.1% missing is diminished influence in future projects, which rather obviously if we are leaving, we should have no say at.
|
Even if you're right, what you're saying has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. So I don't think it's me missing the point. Yet again.
|
Where did I say that labour won?
|
On June 13 2017 19:08 TheDwf wrote:
1) The legitimate debate about the UE and the euro is completely polluted by the FN, which turns anything it touches to dirt.
I can agree with that. The current wave of populists who thought Trump was a good ally and take a fascist organization as their base give too much clout to the folk who want to just paint the opposition with a broad, racist/fascist stroke. The people who would support anti-EU policy are far more numerous than those who might vote FN. Brexit showed the difference between the UKIP base and the "leave the EU" base. Even though the legislature had a very different opinion of it all.
|
Comparing France and the UK in regards to the EU makes absolutely 0 sense, whatsoever. The UK people has never been emotionally invested in the EU, have had a very ambivalent relationship with the whole thing from day 1 and have been torn apart with their close relationship to both the continent and the US for fifty years.
Brexit makes absolutely 0 sense on a practical level but a lot of sense when you consider british people secular view on continental europe which has always been very defiant, and always protective of the independence of the country. On that respect, British insular mentality is completely unique in Europe.
If you think that you can make a parallel between French and British public opinion regarding the European Union, I'm afraid you are completely mistaken.
|
France is certainly a very different country from Britain, that much is true. But the comparison is valid on a much narrower scale: Eurosceptic sentiment > potential FN support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
