france goes with the socialist

[bud]

Hollande wants to renegotiate a hard-won European treaty on budget cuts that Germany's Angela Merkel and Sarkozy had championed. He wants more government stimulus, and more government spending in general despite concerns from markets that France needs to urgently trim its huge debts.

The election outcome could also have an impact on how long French troops stay in Afghanistan and how France exercises its military and diplomatic muscle around the world.

link

it will be interesting to see how this will play out.

[Guest Manny]

it will be interesting to see how this will play out.

Yes it will, I suspect there might be a few more elections "turning left" in Europe soon, and perhaps even beyond. People are not seeing any real improvement with the right-wing parties. They've shown themselves to be too pro-business, too pro the wealthy elite. Not enough concern for the common man, no concern for the environment, too greedy, to the point of unsustainability. The pattern is always the same. With this perhaps the worm has turned.

Edited May 7, 2012 by Manny

[Michael Hardner]

Yes it will, I suspect there might be a few more elections "turning left" in Europe soon, and perhaps even beyond. People are not seeing any real improvement with the right-wing parties. They've shown themselves to be too pro-business, too pro the wealthy elite. Not enough concern for the common man, no concern for the environment, too greedy, to the point of unsustainability. The pattern is always the same. With this perhaps the worm has turned.

This is a fine story, but everything is relative. How could this narrative be true in Europe AND in North America where the worker has fewer perks, less vacation time and less job security ?

If a left wing revolution happened here, we'd likely end up with the same system deemed right-wing in Europe, wouldn't we ?

[Guest Manny]

This is a fine story, but everything is relative. How could this narrative be true in Europe AND in North America where the worker has fewer perks, less vacation time and less job security ?

In several ways. One is very simple, through the media. People who read the news will know that this is happening in Europe, as a backlash against the policies of the right. People in North America who feel the same pressures as those in Europe, regardless of the details of amount of perks or vacation time, will react in the same way by their dissatisfaction. The system always works that way, like a pendulum it's just a matter of time.

When one government has finally exploited its position to the point of diminishing returns, there really is no other choice.

If a left wing revolution happened here, we'd likely end up with the same system deemed right-wing in Europe, wouldn't we ?

They may be more leftist in Europe than we are, even when they swing right. But there has been a strong movement to pull them to the right, just as much there as we have here. These are global initiatives, much as there is a "Communist International", there is a "Right-Wing International".

[Michael Hardner]

They may be more leftist in Europe than we are, even when they swing right. But there has been a strong movement to pull them to the right, just as much there as we have here. These are global initiatives, much as there is a "Communist International", there is a "Right-Wing International".

So, you're saying that any leftist there who makes absolute pronouncements on their situation (as opposed to relative pronouncements) isn't being accurate ?

That means that if they say "the right is trying to take more from us" then that is accurate, but if they say "we're disadvantaged" then it's not accurate.

[Michael Hardner]

Questions that come to mind:

"How long until the new communism ?"

"What can they do this time around to avoid the mistakes of the old communism ?"

[cybercoma]

Communism is dead. The true definition of communism is a society without classes. That will never happen in our lifetimes.

Yeah. I know you should never say never, but take a look at the last two centuries or so. Capitalism adapts and evolves. Our current state of 'advanced' capitalism involves government intervention in the economy to smooth out the cycle and support those that suffer from dips. In a true communist society, this would be completely unnecessary.

[-TSS-]

I'm glad that Hollande won. I think the German solution to the financial crisis is far too strict and the pact should be renegotiated.

[eyeball]

Questions that come to mind:

"How long until the new communism ?"

"What can they do this time around to avoid the mistakes of the old communism ?"

Sousveillance sousveillance sousveillance.

Did I say sousveillance?

Ironically, the right could probably avoid a lot of the the mistakes it keeps making if it did this too.

Edited May 7, 2012 by eyeball

[Michael Hardner]

Communism is dead. The true definition of communism is a society without classes. That will never happen in our lifetimes.

Our lifetime ? That's less than the tick of a clock though. The Soviet Union rose to world power before many of us here were born.

Our current state of 'advanced' capitalism involves government intervention in the economy to smooth out the cycle and support those that suffer from dips.

There are limits as to what can be done, especially if the people don't support austerity measures, bailouts and so on.

[wyly]

There are limits as to what can be done, especially if the people don't support austerity measures, bailouts and so on.

austerity has it's place but so does working for a living wage...the same consideration that is given to support bank CEO's and multinational corporation and their bailouts must be extended to the working class that support those Bank Ceo's and Multinational corps, without the lower and middle classes the Banks and Corp would not exist...

[dre]

Our lifetime ? That's less than the tick of a clock though. The Soviet Union rose to world power before many of us here were born.

There are limits as to what can be done, especially if the people don't support austerity measures, bailouts and so on.

Greece needs above all to extricate itself from the credit trap. It should never have accepted the last bailout and the ECB made damn sure that deal was signed before the people have greece could weigh in on it in an election.

And now that the greeks have finally had their say the EC says this...

The commission hopes and expects that the future government of Greece will respect the engagements that Greece has entered into," spokeswoman Pia Ahrenkilde Hansen told reporters.

[Michael Hardner]

austerity has it's place but so does working for a living wage...

This is my big problem with analyzing the left/right struggle in America and Europe with the same lens. Was Greece, with its relatively generous pensions and benefits not providing a living wage ? If they had cut back, they would still have a better situation for their worker than we do.

the same consideration that is given to support bank CEO's and multinational corporation and their bailouts must be extended to the working class that support those Bank Ceo's and Multinational corps, without the lower and middle classes the Banks and Corp would not exist...

It's the same consideration, i.e. propping up of the status quo after mistakes almost collapse it.

[Michael Hardner]

Greece needs above all to extricate itself from the credit trap.

How, though ? Austerity would do that, right ? So would defaulting, adopting Marxism, selling off assets wholesale...

[Guest Manny]

This is my big problem with analyzing the left/right struggle in America and Europe with the same lens. Was Greece, with its relatively generous pensions and benefits not providing a living wage ? If they had cut back, they would still have a better situation for their worker than we do.

And like everyone else, they will try to defend what they have.

There are limits as to what can be done, especially if the people don't support austerity measures, bailouts and so on.

I think people might be more inclined to support austerity measures, knowing it's truly needed and they're not being ripped off. People would be willing to "tighten their belts" a bit more. But they'd have to see that kind of sacrifice taking place at all levels. It's when we see that their profit margins are ever-expanding, and that top execs get 19% bonuses for a bad year in the economy, people feel things are just a little one-sided. And that doesn't matter what side of the pond you're on.

[Michael Hardner]

And like everyone else, they will try to defend what they have.

Right, but the language of absolutes is normally used to convinced those who are unaware. I've always been against using the language of mass media on this board. Likewise, I don't agree with pretending we're a Sunday morning politics show. We're an informed public on MLW. We can pick through the BS in better ways than journalists can in many ways.

I think people might be more inclined to support austerity measures, knowing it's truly needed and they're not being ripped off. People would be willing to "tighten their belts" a bit more. But they'd have to see that kind of sacrifice taking place at all levels. It's when we see that their profit margins are ever-expanding, and that top execs get 19% bonuses for a bad year in the economy, people feel things are just a little one-sided. And that doesn't matter what side of the pond you're on.

I agree with this approach, but in the short term they need to get people to invest in the country. This likely means that the people will have to sacrifice more.

[Guest Manny]

Right, but the language of absolutes is normally used to convinced those who are unaware. I've always been against using the language of mass media on this board. Likewise, I don't agree with pretending we're a Sunday morning politics show. We're an informed public on MLW. We can pick through the BS in better ways than journalists can in many ways.

It's the same thing, within a given frame of reference. People feel just as passionately about getting ripped off in France as they do in Canada, no matter how much you tell them they've still got it better than in Pakistan.

I agree with this approach, but in the short term they need to get people to invest in the country. This likely means that the people will have to sacrifice more.

If the approach you agree with is being "fair", they'd better get started soon! Too late now for France.

[Guest Manny]

But it doesn't even matter if they try to be fair now. The worm must turn again. It is in fact an important part of how the system works in order to maintain a certain balance. Hear about that riot in the streets, in Montreal? It's the sound of inevitability...

[Michael Hardner]

If the approach you agree with is being "fair", they'd better get started soon! Too late now for France.

Being "fair" is what works most of the time, but not all of the time. There are times when what works overrides what is fair. Do you think it's fair government to seize all your assets without any promise to pay you back ? That's not fair but they may need to do that sometimes.

[Guest Manny]

Being "fair" is what works most of the time, but not all of the time. There are times when what works overrides what is fair. Do you think it's fair government to seize all your assets without any promise to pay you back ? That's not fair but they may need to do that sometimes.

Again people are willing to make certain sacrifices, when they know that it's important and the cause is just. Then what will be fair is that after that crisis is over, there is some attempt at restitution. Even if it is not completely equitable, this helps to improve morale and cooperation.

What does not help is continued pillaging of public coffers, expecting people to give up the things that benefit them while the aristocracy "party on". It's not about "Gods vs. Lemmings", everybody's human. Everybody has eyes and a brain, and they can see what's going on. They can tell, when they're getting systematically screwed.

[Michael Hardner]

What does not help is continued pillaging of public coffers, expecting people to give up the things that benefit them while the aristocracy "party on". It's not about "Gods vs. Lemmings", everybody's human. Everybody has eyes and a brain, and they can see what's going on. They can tell, when they're getting systematically screwed.

How much of this protest should be about the inherent unfairness of the system ? Because if it's about that, then this discussion is clearly about blowing up (figuratively, I hope) and starting over. Regardless of the proclaimed benefits of that option, people need to know what might happen in the near term.

[Guest Peeves]

I predict the government will collapse, the economy will implode, and bankruptcy will be inevitable with the collapse too of the E.U.

Beware of Greeks baring miffs.

[cybercoma]

Our lifetime ? That's less than the tick of a clock though. The Soviet Union rose to world power before many of us here were born.

And the Soviet Union wasn't truly communist. Classes were not eradicated. It was a top-down implementation of Communism, so it was bound to fail from the beginning. There were still class differences.

There are limits as to what can be done, especially if the people don't support austerity measures, bailouts and so on.

Absolutely, I don't deny that. However, the fact of the matter is that "society" doesn't look at businesses and say, "what the hell are you doing?" when the economy fails, declines, or struggles. We now look to the government and say, "what the hell are you going to do about this?" That government intervention is advanced capitalism, which is socialist. It's an attempt to ensure the welfare of society by getting involved in some way. In the early 20th century people held companies responsible. Those violent clashes between labour and the companies or the companies' hired thugs were a result of people holding businesses accountable for the economy. That's certainly not the case today. We hold the government accountable.

[Michael Hardner]

And the Soviet Union wasn't truly communist. Classes were not eradicated. It was a top-down implementation of Communism, so it was bound to fail from the beginning. There were still class differences.

Ok, well... "in our lifetimes" isn't very long is the point.

Absolutely, I don't deny that. However, the fact of the matter is that "society" doesn't look at businesses and say, "what the hell are you doing?" when the economy fails, declines, or struggles. We now look to the government and say, "what the hell are you going to do about this?"

That government intervention is advanced capitalism, which is socialist. It's an attempt to ensure the welfare of society by getting involved in some way. In the early 20th century people held companies responsible. Those violent clashes between labour and the companies or the companies' hired thugs were a result of people holding businesses accountable for the economy. That's certainly not the case today. We hold the government accountable.

I would characterize those clashes as people fighting for their own economic well-being.

The government is where we go for help, as it should be.

[dre]

How, though ? Austerity would do that, right ? So would defaulting, adopting Marxism, selling off assets wholesale...

They should re-establish their own currency and default. IMO the recent bailout and its austerity provisions will just make things worse. The government is being forced to sell off assets that generate a profit for them. And it does nothing to address the real problem which is that interest rates in the eurozone are way to low for a country in greeces position.

Not to mention they are taxing you and I to "fund it". The Eurozone was a bad idea especially for certain countries, and the sooner it fails the less it will cost all of us.