This is nothing like the American elections of the recent past. Which, by the way, we are totally not relitigating constantly on all our social media channels because we have absolutely not determined that when fighting fascism, what really matters is how much the people who would also like to fight fascism, when it comes to it, felt about the person you think should have won the primaries that happened nearly a year ago now! We are Americans. We of course have united against all of the evil we have been confronted with, because our priorities are awesome and perfect and anyway everyone knows that in the primaries the best candidate was clearly Vermin Supreme. Or possibly Joe Exotic. Frankly, we should have gone with both, because Supreme/Exotic is the next logical step after Trump. Exotic/Supreme might feel just a titch Italian for a truly American ticket.
1/ "you've read", but where?2/ since scarf-wearing only takes place from puberty onwards, young schoolgirls have NOT covered their heads in public for many years. Furthermore, until a few years ago only old muslim women wore headscarves in France, it was considered backwards by younger Muslim women. The insistance on wearing a veil is recent and a bad sign, a consequence of a reactionary drive to use religion as an identity marker.3/ racism and xenophobia are different issues even if they can overlap. Do you claim for instance that white American racism against African Americans is xenophobic? (Same for white French racism against black Antillais).4/ please do not distort my opinions. What was "fantasized" in my comment was the belief that recent populations refuse to mesh into the "French way of life", not the fact that they may experience rejection by segments of the "french" population.
Maybe a central quote from the article ?"Chez Macron, cependant, le vide n’est pas contradictoire avec un plein dont, pour le coup, on comprend que, s’il faut montrer quelque chose au dehors, le vide lui soit hautement préférable. Car c’est le plein de l’oligarchie, le plein du projet de persévérance d’une classe, au moment précis où tout la condamne, comme en témoigne une époque qu’on sent rendue en son point de bascule. Dans ces conditions, pour que le plein oligarchique se maintienne envers et contre tout, il fallait en effet impérativement un candidat du vide, un candidat qui ne dise rien car ce qu’il y aurait à dire vraiment serait d’une obscénité imprésentable : les riches veulent rester riches et les puissants puissants. C’est le seul projet de cette classe, et c’est la seule raison d’être de son Macron."
I put it through Google translate and the result is ugly but I believe decipherable.
Thank you ! " Les puissants puissants ," yes, that's certainly the creed of the 1%. Now I'm completely obsessed with translating the article whose link you provided.Yet, I'm not sure how much it would cost and which website to go to.Macron identifies himself as a former communist or socialist, no ?
Yet, " Un candidat qui ne dise rien/ car ce qu'il aurait a dire vraiment serait d'une obscenite / les riches veulent rester riches, " Very similar to Trump. Tight lipped on the status quo. I knew I wasn't that far off on my translation....still not sure if he's representing himself as a socialist / communist.
Not really. He participated in the center left government of Parti Socialiste's François Hollande, but was himself a party member only during his student years (between age 19 and 22) and now claims to be a consensual candidate standing for "modernity" and (unspecified) "reform". In other words, he represents the deregulatory forces who hide behind a posture of nonpartisan neutrality to defend a system that promotes ever more inequality.
No actually he's much closer to Hillary. People who stand for fringe improvements of the system to prevent social revolt while preserving as much of the status quo as possible for our ruling elites. Trump is more like Le Pen, someone who gives voice to popular anger against the system but deflects that anger towards scapegoat migrants and against the safeguard mechanisms of democracy instead of against the ruling class.
The good news is that your failure to consider yourself "progressive" is probably an accurate characterization. The bad news is, you don't seem to get it. But hey, keep fucking that chicken. What's the worst that can happen?
Ha ! Generalizing Hillary's substantial contributions as Secretary of State for N.Y cut no ice here i.e " While preserving much of the Status quo. "Quid Pro Quo, that's the name of the game in politics. But Thank-you for the information on Macron.Now I'll translate the article and decide for myself. 😉
Why yes, yes I do. There have been NUMEROUS depictions in the media of Muslim teens in France being barred from attending class, au lycee. Not as wee bairns." The insistence on wearing the veil is recent & a bad sign, " oh, dear, to YOU, perhaps, not the devout Muslims.Invasions of Kuwait, Afghanistan, Pakistan, & Syria with heavy Civilian casualties, a beleaguered Middle East and Les Francaises ne veulent pans le veil ?! Upsets their Nationalism ?I'm afraid I've seen French racism up close and personal from my time living there. That's why you amuse me. No offence. Asking Muslim women to remove their veils in public is like asking the sun not shine. Just sayin'.
And like all good "progressives", you can't understand how a hawkish, TPP-supporting, favourite of Wall Street didn't rally the left like she should have. I mean, she's pals with Kissinger fer Chrissakes. Let that sink in for a second. Your "progressive" hero is pals with Henry motherfucking Kissinger. How could she lose?
It's OK. You're an American. You probably have no fucking clue what the left/right spectrum actually represents objectively or elsewhere in the world. So I suppose that from where you sit, you actually ARE "progressive". Kudos. And your ageist bullshit is simply adorable. I'm sure you were very radical 50+ years ago, dumbass.
How does it compare to the condescending, snotty chauvinism of "You're an American. You probably have no fucking clue what the left/right spectrum actually represents"?
I notice you just keep repeating baseless slams against HRC, and didn't even BOTHER to try to address that she was the 11th most liberal senator during her tenure and that she and Bernie voted together more than 90% of the time.
So here's a fun exercise in reality for you - go on and find the name of a piece of legislation that Clinton, the Senator from New York State, where Wall Street - an important financial driver in our state - is located, wrote or sponsored or supported that directly screwed the little guy to benefit Wall Street. Go on... I'll wait. You'll be gone a long time.
And while you're searching, how about you consider this - that, as a fucking grown up, I don't have to love every thing that a candidate does or supports to recognize that she and I agree on most things, and to support her on that basis. It's only purity ponies and bullshit artists who claim that a single disagreement with someone turns that person into Satan.
And don't preen yourself too heavily as a "real" progressive, either. You appear to support a guy who treats issues of discrimination and violations of civil rights facing women and people of color like second-tier distractions from the only issue he's really interested in. Is that "progressive" to you? It's not to me. He supports gun manufacturers over gun violence victims. Is that "progressive" to you? It's not to me. He voted five times for military intervention but made unbelievable hay out of Clinton's vote for the Iraq War. Is that kind of hypocrisy "progressive" to you? It isn't to me. He negotiated an agreement based on rank environmental racism, was called out for it by progressives, and ignored those calls. "Progressive" enough for you? Because that doesn't say progressive to me at all. So don't tell me how soiled HRC is, you ignorant asswipe.
And your weak-ass "oh, she's pals with Kissinger, so she's automatically awful" is just bullshit. Socializing with someone doesn't put you in their pockets, you gullible nitwit. Ted Kennedy's best friend in the Senate was Orrin Hatch, and not ONCE did his positions change as a result. When you see HIS policies in HER positions, THEN it's a problem. Until then, it's just gossip....which, I have to say, appears to be how you get your information about American politics.
About 2 1/2 feet above my a-hole.
Please do. Even better if you can justify your opinion.
No. As a matter of fact, Thomas Piketty supports the candidacy of socialist Benoît Hamon.
1/ "you've read", but where?2/ since scarf-wearing only takes place from puberty onwards, young schoolgirls have NOT covered their heads in public for many years. Furthermore, until a few years ago only old muslim women wore headscarves in France, it was considered backwards by younger Muslim women. The insistance on wearing a veil is recent and a bad sign, a consequence of a reactionary drive to use religion as an identity marker.3/ racism and xenophobia are different issues even if they can overlap. Do you claim for instance that white American racism against African Americans is xenophobic? (Same for white French racism against black Antillais).4/ please do not distort my opinions. What was "fantasized" in my comment was the belief that recent populations refuse to mesh into the "French way of life", not the fact that they may experience rejection by segments of the "french" population.
Maybe a central quote from the article ?"Chez Macron, cependant, le vide n’est pas contradictoire avec un plein dont, pour le coup, on comprend que, s’il faut montrer quelque chose au dehors, le vide lui soit hautement préférable. Car c’est le plein de l’oligarchie, le plein du projet de persévérance d’une classe, au moment précis où tout la condamne, comme en témoigne une époque qu’on sent rendue en son point de bascule. Dans ces conditions, pour que le plein oligarchique se maintienne envers et contre tout, il fallait en effet impérativement un candidat du vide, un candidat qui ne dise rien car ce qu’il y aurait à dire vraiment serait d’une obscénité imprésentable : les riches veulent rester riches et les puissants puissants. C’est le seul projet de cette classe, et c’est la seule raison d’être de son Macron."
I put it through Google translate and the result is ugly but I believe decipherable.
Thank you ! " Les puissants puissants ," yes, that's certainly the creed of the 1%. Now I'm completely obsessed with translating the article whose link you provided.Yet, I'm not sure how much it would cost and which website to go to.Macron identifies himself as a former communist or socialist, no ?
Yet, " Un candidat qui ne dise rien/ car ce qu'il aurait a dire vraiment serait d'une obscenite / les riches veulent rester riches, " Very similar to Trump. Tight lipped on the status quo. I knew I wasn't that far off on my translation....still not sure if he's representing himself as a socialist / communist.
Not really. He participated in the center left government of Parti Socialiste's François Hollande, but was himself a party member only during his student years (between age 19 and 22) and now claims to be a consensual candidate standing for "modernity" and (unspecified) "reform". In other words, he represents the deregulatory forces who hide behind a posture of nonpartisan neutrality to defend a system that promotes ever more inequality.
No actually he's much closer to Hillary. People who stand for fringe improvements of the system to prevent social revolt while preserving as much of the status quo as possible for our ruling elites. Trump is more like Le Pen, someone who gives voice to popular anger against the system but deflects that anger towards scapegoat migrants and against the safeguard mechanisms of democracy instead of against the ruling class.
The good news is that your failure to consider yourself "progressive" is probably an accurate characterization. The bad news is, you don't seem to get it. But hey, keep fucking that chicken. What's the worst that can happen?
Ha ! Generalizing Hillary's substantial contributions as Secretary of State for N.Y cut no ice here i.e " While preserving much of the Status quo. "Quid Pro Quo, that's the name of the game in politics. But Thank-you for the information on Macron.Now I'll translate the article and decide for myself. 😉
Oh, I can justify my opinion.
Why yes, yes I do. There have been NUMEROUS depictions in the media of Muslim teens in France being barred from attending class, au lycee. Not as wee bairns." The insistence on wearing the veil is recent & a bad sign, " oh, dear, to YOU, perhaps, not the devout Muslims.Invasions of Kuwait, Afghanistan, Pakistan, & Syria with heavy Civilian casualties, a beleaguered Middle East and Les Francaises ne veulent pans le veil ?! Upsets their Nationalism ?I'm afraid I've seen French racism up close and personal from my time living there. That's why you amuse me. No offence. Asking Muslim women to remove their veils in public is like asking the sun not shine. Just sayin'.
Honey, I was progressive before you were fucking born.
You think you folks invented it?
And like all good "progressives", you can't understand how a hawkish, TPP-supporting, favourite of Wall Street didn't rally the left like she should have. I mean, she's pals with Kissinger fer Chrissakes. Let that sink in for a second. Your "progressive" hero is pals with Henry motherfucking Kissinger. How could she lose?
It's OK. You're an American. You probably have no fucking clue what the left/right spectrum actually represents objectively or elsewhere in the world. So I suppose that from where you sit, you actually ARE "progressive". Kudos. And your ageist bullshit is simply adorable. I'm sure you were very radical 50+ years ago, dumbass.
Oh, my "ageist bullshit is simply adorable"?
How does it compare to the condescending, snotty chauvinism of "You're an American. You probably have no fucking clue what the left/right spectrum actually represents"?
I notice you just keep repeating baseless slams against HRC, and didn't even BOTHER to try to address that she was the 11th most liberal senator during her tenure and that she and Bernie voted together more than 90% of the time.
So here's a fun exercise in reality for you - go on and find the name of a piece of legislation that Clinton, the Senator from New York State, where Wall Street - an important financial driver in our state - is located, wrote or sponsored or supported that directly screwed the little guy to benefit Wall Street. Go on... I'll wait. You'll be gone a long time.
And while you're searching, how about you consider this - that, as a fucking grown up, I don't have to love every thing that a candidate does or supports to recognize that she and I agree on most things, and to support her on that basis. It's only purity ponies and bullshit artists who claim that a single disagreement with someone turns that person into Satan.
And don't preen yourself too heavily as a "real" progressive, either. You appear to support a guy who treats issues of discrimination and violations of civil rights facing women and people of color like second-tier distractions from the only issue he's really interested in. Is that "progressive" to you? It's not to me. He supports gun manufacturers over gun violence victims. Is that "progressive" to you? It's not to me. He voted five times for military intervention but made unbelievable hay out of Clinton's vote for the Iraq War. Is that kind of hypocrisy "progressive" to you? It isn't to me. He negotiated an agreement based on rank environmental racism, was called out for it by progressives, and ignored those calls. "Progressive" enough for you? Because that doesn't say progressive to me at all. So don't tell me how soiled HRC is, you ignorant asswipe.
And your weak-ass "oh, she's pals with Kissinger, so she's automatically awful" is just bullshit. Socializing with someone doesn't put you in their pockets, you gullible nitwit. Ted Kennedy's best friend in the Senate was Orrin Hatch, and not ONCE did his positions change as a result. When you see HIS policies in HER positions, THEN it's a problem. Until then, it's just gossip....which, I have to say, appears to be how you get your information about American politics.