- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
deleted by creator
I am glad that there is so much opposition to this within the French government. Because:
-
The French people have the means and the motivation to continue protesting, and this is going to piss them off.
-
The authoritarian country I was born in regularly does this during protests but they also have almost full control of the media and telecomms . People, also, have limited choices of social media (because almost everyone uses a cell phone because the power regularly goes out, and some social media apps use a lot of data). A lot of times people don’t know that they’ve been cut off until it’s already cut.
I’m not saying he is authoritarian but the idea is authoritarian. Macron is clearly panicked, but this is the wildest, and most extreme reaction. Plus, once people get to know of this then they will just create groups on other platforms. This idea is very short sighted.
-
This is the point at which the left-wing in France needs to step the fuck up and convince the centrists that the best way to beat the Nazis is not to vote for Diet Nazi.
There needs to be an alternative to both Macron and Le Pen. I would love to see Macron forced to retire, though considering his authoritarian impulses, it seems unlikely without a vote of misconfidence from parliament.
Note that I’m not super familiar with French political process, so I’m not totally sure how that’d need to play out.
Vote of misconfidence only gets rid of the government (PM and the other ministers), the president stays in place. Macron already theatened the parliament of dissolution (meaning everyone goes home and we do a parliament election) in case of succesful vite of misconfidence. It doesn’t make it impossible but it makes it less likely.
Sounds pretty authoritarian if you ask me
Yep. Our current constitution was designed by De Gaulle, who was military and not too big on parliament power. From the official presidential website “Élysée” (name of the palace where presidential powet resides in France) : While it is based on the Constitution of 1946, the 1958 Constitution is different, as its purpose was to strengthen executive power and stabilize the government, making it more difficult for the Assembly to overthrow.
Sounds like it’s time to destabilize the government and overthrow the presidency.
Maybe the Assembly can’t do it, but the people sure could.
I think its a bit more reasonable to say that “the centrists in France need to step the fuck up and realize that the left is a superior option to Diet Nazi”
If I was French and had to pick between Macron’s hand-picked successor and Le Pen, I would go insane. Vesting so much power in the presidency can only turn presidents into strongmen.
Sympathy from the U.S., where we’ll be told to pick between two fascists once again.
I think the world’s nation-states are widely adopting the “lesser-evil” faux-choice strategy these days, right along with the mass spread of neoliberalism and the all-too-ubiquitous open adoption of its bed-buddy fascism. This is by design. Politicians are waking up to the fact that we aren’t rebelling (effectively) even as they drop the pretense of democracy. The state has enough power over us at this point that it can get away with just about anything it likes.
There is no reasonable rational analysis where Joe Biden is a fascist lol. He’s a neoliberal and I think he sucks, and I truly wish for a different candidate for the Democratic Party. But there is no comparison there between him and the other guy. Not even the same stratosphere.
I think the world’s nation-states are widely adopting the “lesser-evil” faux-choice strategy these days. This is by design
Politics has been an exercise in finding compromise from day 1, thousands of years ago. Any, ANY, system of politics that could reasonably exist, will result in candidates that huge percentages of the country aren’t happy about. Now, I would LOVE any ranked voting method for this country to minimize this effect. We definitely don’t have an amazing system of politics. But “this is by design” is literally untrue unless you believe in some weird conspiracy thing. The US constitution is mega old, most of it’s failures are related to that, imo.
There is no reasonable rational analysis where Joe Biden is a fascist
Oh yes, there most definitely is. He has enacted far more fascist policy in his career of politics than Trump has or ever could. Mass incarceration—including concentration camps—the “War On Drugs”, union busting and strikebreaking, mass surveillance (e.g. the Patriot Act, which he happily takes credit for), militarization of the police, attacks on journalism and whistleblowers, etc. Biden is most definitely fascist. It’s pretty fucking gross of you to practice such denial and apologia, TBH. Putting a donkey and some nice old grampa speeches in front of the policy doesn’t change the policy.
He’s a neoliberal
Yes. That too. As is Trump, by the way. Did you not notice how they share plans to privatize social programs like Social Security? Man, if I had a nickel for everyone who believes that a politician subscribing to neoliberal ideology means they can’t also subscribe to fascist ideology. Whew! The two liberal (yes, liberal) tendencies are completely complementary, and a ton of neoliberal economics—such as privatization—came straight out of Nazi Germany, as practiced directly by fascists in a fascist government. One manages the policy related to economics and so-called “soft power”. The other manages the more direct violence, control, spying, and abuse by the state.
Politics has been an exercise in finding compromise
False. Compromise is simply a tactic. Politics is literally about building and exercising power, and using it to secure and enhance the authority which grants it. “Politics is about compromise” is liberal propaganda that has very little to do with reality. When power relations don’t dictate that compromise is necessary, none is used.
We definitely don’t have an amazing system of politics. But “this is by design” is literally untrue unless you believe in some weird conspiracy thing. The US constitution is mega old, most of it’s failures are related to that, imo.
Again, this is completely incorrect. The U.S. constitution is a reactionary document that was literally designed to curtail democracy. There’s no conspiracy necessary. “Conspiracy” implies secrecy. The so-called “Founding Fathers” literally documented that that was exactly what they were doing, and what they intended. And those in power regularly admit it as well. All you have to do is look at what they say (quite openly!) when the intended audience isn’t the working class. They have their PR guys and the mainstream media to put it into much nicer sounding words when you and I are expected to be paying attention. You should really read more literature by people like Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn. When those in power admit what they’re doing, and when it very much matches their interests to do it (i.e. preserve their power while ensuring you have none), you should probably believe them.
This whole thing is so deranged it’s hard to choose what to highlight, but
Politics is about compromise" is liberal propaganda that has very little to do with reality
Ahh yes, the famous liberal propagandist, Otto Von Bismarck(politics is the art of compromise is derived from his quote “politics is the art of the possible”). I suppose Machiavelli is also a liberal propagandist for writing the Prince in 1512, or any of Jeremy Benthoms works. An entire branch of political philosophy is not propaganda just because you disagree with it.
The viewpoint that politics should be examined from a practical or utilitarian viewpoint is so much older than even the modern concept of Liberal Politics that it’s such a clear and intense revelation of your personal obsessive bias against modern liberals. Which is whatever, I’m sick and tired of not having true leftist representitives myself. But c’mon man this whole reply is off the rails.
You should really read more literature by people like Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn
Yeah, people who has a different viewpoint on political nuance are unread and not properly educated, this is definitely going to fix the problem. If I read rules for radicals again, maybe this time it will finally erase the information in my brain about political history.
deranged
Nice. And no: throwing out names doesn’t erase the absolute fucking ignorance of political philosophy you displayed previously, sorry. The point out mentioning Chomsky and Zinn wasn’t about “people with different viewpoints”. It was literally about the U.S. constitution, the design of the modern system, and your assertion that people who recognize that it is working as intended are wacko conspiracy theorists. Yes, if you’ve really read those works, you should re-read them and actually pay attention this time.
I don’t follow French politics too closely, but from everything I’ve seen, this guy is absolutely DESPISED by the people. Is he not worried about getting voted out or something? Why does he seem to want to stick his finger in the eyes of the French citizens?
deleted by creator
According to the French Constitution, the President cannot serve more than 2 consecutive terms. Macron was elected in 2017 and relected in 2022 (against the far-right candidate) so he can’t be candidate in 2027.
Before 2027, there won’t be any meaningful national election in France (European congress in 2024 and municipal elections in 2026).
Also, Macron hasn’t the absolute majority at the French national assembly, but there are tools in the Constitution which allow the government to pass laws without a vote. And the opposition is not strong enough to dismiss the government.
tools in the Constitution which allow the government to pass laws without a vote
That sounded terrible until I realized that’s what the Supreme Court can and just did do in the US with their completely made up Major Questions Doctrine.
The French always hate their presidents and most French presidents have had abysmal approval ratings. It’s a national sport, maybe for a reason.
He’s playing the same game US democrats are, where it’s either him or a fascist.
Nah. We just have the “choice” between different flavors of fascist in the U.S. There’s no (mainstream) non-fascist choice.
You telling me there is someone worse in France right now?
Le Pen, yes.
Is he not worried about getting voted out or something? Why does he seem to want to stick his finger in the eyes of the French citizens?
From what little I know of French history, I would be worried about losing more than just an election.
Why do people always seem to pick the most horrible responses to crises?.. ;-; ~Strawberry
To my eyes, Macron clearly has some egotistical and authoritarian impulses.
He clearly seems to believe that he knows better than other people, and has little patience for what they want or say.
Why though? And why do so many people, including many who aren’t in power, seem to have similarly awful responses to crises? ~Strawberry
Those who are meant to lead, choose not to. Those who are not meant to lead, choose to do so.
Never trust someone who wishes to become a leader above you.
Wow, that’s fucked up
