Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Politics

French presidential electio

59 replies

longfingernails · 05/04/2012 23:52

Can they both lose please?

Sarkozy is a disgrace to the conservative cause. We had such high hopes when he came in.

Hollande would be fantastic for Britain in the short-term because of the exodus of talented people towards our shores his policies would cause. But medium-term his socialist policies would be bad for Europe (Sarkozy's socialist policies are already bad enough).

Neither candidate has a plan for France to halt her unfortunate decline.

OP posts:
claig · 22/04/2012 21:25

Exactly. I am watching France 24. They have the guests from the 2% greens on, small socialist parties etc., but no guests from the 18.5% Front National. The pundits think the public are stupid and will follow any old spin and opinion polling.

ReactionaryFish · 22/04/2012 21:27

Insofar as the BNP has an economic policy it seems to be a bizzarre mix of old Labour (nationalisation etc) and pre-1850 Tory (massive protectionism). But for such as ttosca the racial element trumps all. Racism = right wing and that's all there is to it. it is pointless trying to educate such people, their brains are too addled by excessive Guardian consumption.

ttosca · 22/04/2012 21:35

lnf-

The BNP are economically left-wing. In fact they are generally an authoritarian left-wing party.

No, they're an authoritarian right-wing party.

Here is some short analysis which says it far more cogently

It's not cogent at all.

There are at least two axes on the political spectrum: left-right, libertarian-authoritarian.

Fascism is right-wing and authoritarian.

You are making another mistake with logic to think that just because fascists want to control the economy, then fascists are left-wing. This is wrong for at least the following reasons:

a) There are many forms of left-wing ideology, from Stalinism (extreme authoritarian) to Anarchism (extreme libertarianism).

b) Most of the ideas of fascism are closer to the concerns and ideas of the right. Those on the right who are extreme authoritarian are fascists:

------

Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:

  1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
  1. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
  1. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
  1. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread
domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
  1. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
  1. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
  1. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
  1. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
  1. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
  1. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

  2. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

  3. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

  4. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

  5. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

www.rense.com/general37/char.htm

ReactionaryFish · 22/04/2012 21:38

I'll save you the bother of reading ttosca's last post.
left-wing = everyone I think is nice and whom I agree with.
right-wing = everyone I think is horrid.

No need to thank me.

ttosca · 22/04/2012 21:39

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

claig · 22/04/2012 21:39

But Dr. Lawrence Britt (whoever he is) seems to have conveniently missed out nationalisation of parts of industry, welfare and protectionism, which are often policies of the left.

ReactionaryFish · 22/04/2012 21:44

"Daily heil?" Nazi jibes, is it? Nice.
you're losing the plot, love. I've reported your post; let's hope MNHQ save you some of the embarrassment you've cause yourself.

claig · 22/04/2012 21:46

Fascist parties also share a communitarianism with the left, a valuation of society and community above the individual freedom prized by conservatives. Conservatives prefer a small state, whereas teh left and extreme right prefer a big state with more authoritarian policies.

ReactionaryFish · 22/04/2012 21:47

Don't bother, claig; she's a fanatic. Either that or pissed.

minimathsmouse · 22/04/2012 22:34

The left doesn't always prefer a large state, google: Libertarian socilaism, anarchic socialism, anarchic syndicalism, all left small state philosophies.

What happened up thread?

niceguy2 · 22/04/2012 22:44

I find myself hoping Hollande will win.

Firstly because he has said he'd pull France out of the fiscal compact and after Sarkozy's treatment of us, that would just be the icing on the cake.

Secondly because Sarkozy always looks like a smug git. He's got that sort of chin you could just give a left hook to.

That said, I disagree with most of his policies. Thank goodness I don't live & vote in France. It's like being stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea.

ttosca · 23/04/2012 00:06

mini-

The left doesn't always prefer a large state, google: Libertarian socilaism, anarchic socialism, anarchic syndicalism, all left small state philosophies.

Yes, I tried to explain this to no avail.

ttosca · 23/04/2012 00:08

ReactionaryFish-

"Daily heil?" Nazi jibes, is it? Nice.

Erm.. yes, the Dail Mail actually did support the Nazis in the 1930s. Now it's supporting the Fascists again.

you're losing the plot, love. I've reported your post; let's hope MNHQ save you some of the embarrassment you've cause yourself.

Oh well done you! I'm sorry to hear that you're so fragile that you felt the need to report my offensive post to get it removed so it can no longer do you any harm.

ttosca · 23/04/2012 00:11

Claig-

Fascist parties also share a communitarianism with the left, a valuation of society and community above the individual freedom prized by conservatives. Conservatives prefer a small state, whereas teh left and extreme right prefer a big state with more authoritarian policies.

No, the authoritarian left and authoritarian right prefer a big state. You can't measure ideology on one axis. You need at least two. It's not a matter of 'extremes', it's a matter of authoritarianism vs libertarianism with regards to small or big state.

minimathsmouse · 23/04/2012 08:24

Ttosca is correct you can not measure ideology on a simple left right axis. I tried in vain to make the same point a few weeks ago, I sometimes think the prevailing left-right language misleads people.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum Eysencks Political spectrum model is quite useful and easy to understand and the Nolan chart is also worth consideration.

One of the best models for understanding political differences and similarities is the Status-quo revolutionary axis.

Seems as though Holland is 2% in the lead but I wonder noe what will happen because Le pen polled 18%

VikingVagine · 23/04/2012 09:53

This morning, as I walk down the road, every fourth person I cross will have voted FN, I can't even begin to explain how crap that makes me feel. I love this country but now feel uncomfortable here.

I actually agree that many people who voted FN are left-winged; if you look at Le Pen's proposals, some were really good ideas and I just hope that Hollande has the sense to pick up on these and pledge to support them too because otherwise Sarkozy is in with a real chance of getting her voters.

As for Melanchon not doing as well as expected, I do think he was popular, but many people were worried of a repeat of 2002 and preferred to vote Hollande just in case.

MrPants · 23/04/2012 10:07
  1. The International, Keep the Red Flag Flying, the Red Banner etc.

  2. The Gulags, the Stasi.

  3. Trotsky, the Kulaks.

  4. The Red Army.

  5. ?Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated.? So there should be dozens of prominent women from the Warsaw Pact nations? Care to name one?

  6. Pravda

  7. KGB, Stasi?

  8. Corporate power is subsumed by the state.

  9. Solidarity, Lech Walensa etc?

  10. Solzhenitsyn

  11. Ceausescu?s, Kim?s etc.

  12. Why bother with a vote if it?s only going to be rigged anyway?

Face it; Fascism and Communism are opposite ends of the same turd. The turd itself is socialism.

minimathsmouse · 23/04/2012 11:08

Just reading MR pants one would assume that we are returning to 1920's, a war between fascism and communism. The two end of the same turd (I concur) although he seems not to realise that the middle ground is like shifting sands and has become startlingly like fascism.

The war on terror, the capitalist class making money out of the war machine, the selling of military hardware, gauntanamo bay, the detention of terrorists without trial, the torture of suspects.......The uk Government wanting out of EU and to close it's boarders, the political class no longer representing the electorate instead pandering to the needs of corporations, the socialisation of risks and the privatisation of capital......The increasing state supervision and security in all walks of life like the fact that the UK has 1 camera to every 4 citizens, the state wants to monitor your emails and telephone conversations because of the perceived threat of Islamic terrorists.............UK politics is rife with lobbying, bribes through the party donar system, politicians in bed with the press, Prime ministers who will tell murdoch anything he wants just as long as he sells their brand for them, the fact that time and again good academic research is dismissed whilst research paid for by corporations is churned out and used to feed children contaminated beef.......

All the while we the workers continue to sell our wage labour. The fact that capital creates the social conditions in which the large state is needed seems to allude those on the right. We pay for the welfare system that private capital will use to to profit and both save and enslave it's most valued resource, people.

MrPants · 23/04/2012 13:12

Hang on a minute; haven't you just been pillorying me on another thread for suggesting we have a smaller government? The big state is the cause of all the problems in the first place.

minimathsmouse · 23/04/2012 14:39

I don't want a big state!!! capitalism creates a need for a big authoritarian state and the welfare state to mop up it's creation of inequality. I would like true democracy from the bottom up and a political and economic system that is responsive to the needs & goals of its people.

niceguy2 · 23/04/2012 15:04

I would like true democracy from the bottom up and a political and economic system that is responsive to the needs & goals of its people.

Can you define what you see as a true democracy? I mean we all get to vote. My vote is as equal as yours and the same as Mr Cameron's himself. Isn't that a very good indicator of democracy?

somebloke123 · 23/04/2012 15:17

I think ReadctionaryFish summed it up well:

^left-wing = everyone I think is nice and whom I agree with.
right-wing = everyone I think is horrid.^

Often people just use the terms "conservative" or "right wing" as a box in which to toss anything bad or that they disagree with.

Some years ago, Boris Yeltsin was involved in a stand-off with some political opponents and confront them.

These opponents were hard-line communists. But in its reports the BBC did not refer to them as such, but as "hard-line conservatives".

Extremist sharia-supporting muslime clerics are often referred to in this way too, even though there's not much about modern civilisation that they would want to conserve.

The BNP is in favour of nationalisation, trade protectionism, workers cooperatives, does best in traditional labour voting areas and has in the past marketed itself as "the Labour Party your grandfathers voted for". Nasty yes, but right wing??

Of course you could say that being racist is by definition right wing but then you'd have to call Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels right wing. Engels thought that as the communist utopia developed, some races would just have to disappear as they would not be capable of suitable advancement. Into this category he placed Serbs and Scottish Highlanders.

You could say that extreme authoritarianism is by definition right wing but then you would mave to call arch-Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw right wing. He thought economically unproductive adults should be gassed.

Betelguese · 23/04/2012 16:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

VikingVagine · 23/04/2012 16:32

Yeah, it's quite disturbing, but there are lots this time unfortunately.

ttosca · 23/04/2012 16:43

I would like true democracy from the bottom up and a political and economic system that is responsive to the needs & goals of its people.

Can you define what you see as a true democracy? I mean we all get to vote. My vote is as equal as yours and the same as Mr Cameron's himself. Isn't that a very good indicator of democracy?

No. Being able to vote once every four years for tweedle-dum or tweedle-dee with virtually indistinguishable platforms, where parties feel no obligation to implement their manifesto pledges, and indeed, do the very opposite, and where they feel free to break international law is not a democracy.

We don't live in a democracy, we live in a plutocracy. Philip Green, tax avoider extraordinaire advised the government on how to implement austerity cuts. 50% of funding for the Conservative party comes from the City of London, while the majority of Government members are millionaires with connections to the wealthy elite and major corporations. There is an obvious conflict of interest there.

Nor is government representative when the vast overwhelming majority are white, upper-middle class, Oxbridge education, wealthy males.

I've said all of this before. You may find this situation satisfactory, but not everybody has such a debased notion of democracy.