French Presidential Election 2012

[Ormurinn]

Spare me the outrage. You must have missed the bit where I said I didn't care much for the three major parties. Labour and the Tories shamelessly play to the Daily Mail/The Sun gallery when it comes to immigration too, and have done for years. And no, I live in the sort of bleeding heart liberal area where the BNP doesn't even bother putting up a candidate. And very glad I live there too. The BNP are vile, and you don't need to scratch their surface very much to spot that. If you can't spot that, that's your problem.

Oh yeah, and you didn't say anything about my pointing out the BNP share of the vote isn't actually very high at all.

The Mail and the Sun are the two best-selling papers in their categories, and their combined marketshare dwarfs that of all other papers in the UK. I have no particular love for either, in fact I despise them, but just to be clear - "the the Daily Mail/The Sun gallery" is the vast majority of the newspaper-reading public in the UK. Playing to them is actually the Duty of a government in a democratic country. That you think it's wrong to do does nothing but demonstrate your elitism.

What should our country's policy on immigration be in your view?

Fifth place in the general election doesn't seem bad to me, for a party in their position - they really have got everything set against them. But you're missing the point. I do not want the BNP to get into power! I'd like them to gain a more significant electoral presence to induce the main parties to sit up and actually listen to the people, but I hold no love for Nick Griffin or his party.

[jules.LT]

elitism

You use that word like it's a bad thing

I'd like them to gain a more significant electoral presence to induce the main parties to sit up and actually listen to the people

That party does not represent "the people", as demonstrated by their election results. The FN got 17% on the first round of the French presidential elections, and we're not even sure what to make of it...

Sarkozy does anyway: he's now unashamedly pandering to their electorate by denouncing Hollande's promise to give long-term resident foreigners the right to vote at local elections, saying that muslims support Hollande, etc.

[Ormurinn]

elitism

You use that word like it's a bad thing

It Is. You can't be a political elitist and support democracy - they're polar opposites

I'd like them to gain a more significant electoral presence to induce the main parties to sit up and actually listen to the people

That party does not represent "the people", as demonstrated by their election results. The FN got 17% on the first round of the French presidential elections, and we're not even sure what to make of it...

Sarkozy does anyway: he's now unashamedly pandering to their electorate by denouncing Hollande's promise to give long-term resident foreigners the right to vote at local elections, saying that muslims support Hollande, etc.

First off I'd say that theres a difference between presidential elections and elections for reperesentatives.

Secondly - hardly anyone in the UK wants the BNP in power. Griffin is a money grubbing bastard, and the upper echelons of the party are upper class toffs with a Nazi fetish (though their lower ranks are pretty good eggs from what i've heard - their candidate in the London assembly's made a few things better, apparently)

That said - the average Brit wants at the very least a sane, points-based immigration system similar to Australia's. After the disastrous open-door policy we've been saddled with though, a good number of people support a complete moratorium on immigration for a few years until the country finishes reeling. No major party will countenance either sort of policy though, as any MP who dares talk about immigration frankly gets branded a racist. Theres also the issue that neither Labour nor the Tories want a cut in immigration levels - Labour because immigrants vote overwhelmingly for a bigger welfare state, and the Tories because large numbers of unskilled workers flooding into the country dovetails nicely with their policy of ruthlessly deflating wages at every possible opportunity.

The BNP also have pretty good policies on the economy - since theres no alternative to the neoliberal clusterfuck we've been subjected to in the three main policies. People who remember the good old days before Thatcher tend to look kindly on any party thats willing to consider renationalisation - particularly of a rail network gutted by private-sector asset stripping.

The goalposts in this country's game of political football need moving - and theres no other party willing to do so. Probably less that one in a hundred Brits would like the BNP in power - but they represent the will of the people on a lot of issues far better than the big three.

(Pandering to the electorate is the job of a politician in a democracy by the way...)

[Dark567]

elitism

You use that word like it's a bad thing

I'm not sure if its a language thing or what, but yes elitism is pretty much implicitly a bad thing.

[charliepanayi]

(Pandering to the electorate is the job of a politician in a democracy by the way...)

No it isn't, sometimes a politician's job is to try and change public opinion, not just respond to it.

[Ormurinn]

(Pandering to the electorate is the job of a politician in a democracy by the way...)

No it isn't, sometimes a politician's job is to try and change public opinion, not just respond to it.

Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

...Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth

Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.

Politicians serve the people, not the other way around. It patently is not the case that politicians know better than the people who elect them, and should impose their own view on a populace that disagrees. You pretend to be horrified by the prospect of a return to fascism, but your own arguments expose you as having a profound hatred of democracy.

[Zamfir]

So, French elections are about the BNP and Lincoln?

[bigglesworth]

Tangential relation: http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/nick-griffin-congratulates-marine-le-pen-poll-success

[jules.LT]

please don't attribute to me what Ormurinn said

[charliepanayi]

Abarham Lincoln and Thomas Paine never saw people expressing their opinions on the internet.

[Zamfir]

I watching parts of the debate of yesterday. They really don't like each other, do they? Sarkozy in particular gives me the impression that he takes any threat to his position as a personal insult.

[jules.LT]

There's also the fact that Hollande has a reputation for being too soft and undecisive. He very clearly was working to counter that image.
As for Sarkozy... it comes to him more naturally.

[Zamfir]

Yeah, that feels right. The antagonism was too thick to be unintended, even if they really can't stand each other.

Another thing: to me, Sarkozy still doesn't come over as the president, as the guy who already is in charge. I can't quite put my finger on it. Perhaps it's the contrast with Chirac and Mitterand, who oozed a sentiment of "whatever is wrong with me, I am the president and you are not". Might be age?

Does that sound familiar, or is it just me?

[jules.LT]

I'll throw it out there as I feel it, because I know that many if not most French people feel the same:

Sarko was never dignified in the way that we've come to expect from our presidents. He gesticulates, he has no qualms about flaunting himself in the company of the country's richest, he's aggressive and impulsive... He has no presidential stature. He just doesn't inspire the kind of respect that his predecessors enjoyed.

[Ormurinn]

He has no presidential stature.

Sniggers...

How well would you say Hollande is countering his soft image Jules? To someone used to U.K politics he comes off as a bit of a firebrand honestly...

[jules.LT]

Well, I wasn't talking about his height

As for Hollande, he did look more confident and combative, but I wouldn't call him a firebrand (that's being overly aggressive, right?). He works to be more assertive, but that's not his nature.

[bigglesworth]

A firebrand (in politics) is a true believer, someone who passionately goes on at length about their cause, a fanatic if you're being mean.

[jules.LT]

Thanks

I'm afraid Hollande doesn't fit that profile either, though. He might have worked on the way he comes across, but he's always been a man of compromise (to put it nicely).

[jules.LT]

François Hollande is the new President of France, with about 52% of votes. Yay!

[Djehutynakht]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17975660


Well, this should be interesting.

[charliepanayi]

Hooray for France!

[Diadem]

For France, perhaps, I know next to nothing about French internal politics, perhaps Hollande will be better than Sarkozy on internal matters.

But this, together with the Greek elections earlier this week, about wraps it up for the Euro. And that is very bad news, for Europe and for the world.

[Zamfir]

how's that?

[Diadem]

Well let's look at Greece first. Considering the Greek election results, it's very likely they'll end up with a government that'll reverse most or all of the austerity measures the previous government took. Greek was just starting to recover from the threat of bankruptcy, but if they start repealing reforms, they'll certainly go belly up, destabilizing the Euro.

And Hollande wants to do away with EU regulations limiting budget deficients. But these regulations are the core of Euro stability. And France is not a small country. If France refuses to keep its deficit low, other countries will follow. An already weakened Euro will not survive that.

[Qaanol]

Methinks you misunderstandestimatizificate how things will work. When the new Greek government takes charge and ends austerity, it will presumably (hopefully) do so in conjunction with significant infrastructure projects that will be useful in the future. I don’t know if they really will, or what form that might take, but things like wind farms, solar concentrators, nationwide fiberoptic networks, and a distribution system for electric vehicle rapid-charging come to mind as possibilities.

Projects of that caliber will put people back to work—using “magically created” money that the Greek government will loan itself or will into existence for the time being, to be paid back and removed from circulation at a later time when the economy is stabilized. With people back at work and money flowing, all sorts of companies will grow, both those directly connected to the infrastructure projects, and also just about everything else since more people working means more disposable income.

In a few years’ time, Greece will then have a vibrant economy, companies turning profits and therefore paying taxes, low unemployment, and on top of it all they’ll have high quality modern infrastructure that will last for decades and benefit the whole country. At that point, they can start paying down the debts, by raising taxes on the profiteers who have gotten greedy, both individuals and corporations.

Countries that stay the “austerity” course, on the other hand, will have more and more unemployed people, less and less money to go around (because everytime someone pays back a bank loan, that money disappears from existence, since bank loans also “magically create” money), less and less tax revenue to pay off existing public debt, and they’ll be stuck with old ratty infrastructure.

I’m just sayin’ is all.

[Derek]

Projects of that caliber will put people back to work—using “magically created” money that the Greek government will loan itself or will into existence for the time being, to be paid back and removed from circulation at a later time when the economy is stabilized. With people back at work and money flowing, all sorts of companies will grow, both those directly connected to the infrastructure projects, and also just about everything else since more people working means more disposable income.

Kind of hard to "magically create" money when you're in a monetary union. They would have to get the rest of the EU to agree on it (Read: Get Germany etc. to foot the bill). Now if they left the Euro (as they really should), they could do it at the cost of inflation.

[Zamfir]

Even if you buy into the full Krugman, Greece still can't magically create money and loan it to itself, nor could it spend money and hope that the money stays in Greece. There aren't that many Greek car factories or fiberoptic manufacturers. Greece is not a miniature US.

Within the Eurozone, other countries have to agree on that money creation, and on giving it to Greece. (EDIT: as Derek says) Which they are not going to do if Greece just uses it to keep runnig a deficit, especially as the current Greek deficits are not exactly producing supergrids and solar farms at this moment. Outside of the Eurozone, Greece would be either at the mercy of international financial markets, or they would have to installcapital barriers and rely on its own, very tiny domestic capital market. Again, Greece is no US, it doesn't have the international clout of the US nor a similar internal market. Germany, France and the UK are the only countries in Europe that might vaguely try to go Krugman on their own, but even for them it's dubious.

And Hollande wants to do away with EU regulations limiting budget deficients. But these regulations are the core of Euro stability. And France is not a small country. If France refuses to keep its deficit low, other countries will follow. An already weakened Euro will not survive that.

Trouble is that meeting the regulations is not enough to stabilize the Euro. The Eurozone will have to find a way to lower unemployment in the worst-hit countries. That used to work through currency depreciation, and if the eurozone can't agree on something to replace that, there's not much point in having a Euro.

AFAICT, the deficit-reduction plan is

1. Reduce deficits
2. Trust each other again not to piss away money
3. ???
4. Profit!

Hollande's plan is more like

1. Let's pretend we trust each other
2. ???
3. Profit!
4. Reduce deficits

It's not obviously better, but at least it cuts directly to the ??? part. It can't hurt to have someone on the EU table who has clout, and wants to talk about policies that try to solve the problems. The trust-building is important too, but we might be focussing to much on that for the moment.

[Dark567]

....

I’m just sayin’ is all.

Is this supposed to be a parody? Because the naivety seems to deep to be anything else.