Does it matter who the next French president is, or is France doomed to decline?
Posted by Fareed Zakaria & David Ignatius on April 23, 2007 10:21 AM
Readers’ Responses to Our Question (161)
james b. :
"We have taken the first step." lol. the neocons? who is we?
once again, i doubt very much that sarkozy will side with the u.s. and become an american stooge a la blair. the e.u., more and more, is distancing itself from the u.s. i think that this will continue.
i do agree though that france's economy will strengthen in the coming years, but some of the stuff that neocons wan't to impose upon france like 60 hour work weeks and more "pro-corporation social policies" won't happen.
france is a perennial power, its civilization is strong, and its cultural needs no adjustment by the world bank or washington.
i saw paris je t'aime on friday and it was an excellent film, plus there are a few more excellent french films out now that i'm plannning to see. something like 3 or 4. i don't remember so many french films out in the u.s. market at the same time ever before.
Nicolas Sarkozy has won the election. He will be the next president of France. The French citizens support his idea that immigrants should identify with Western values. As Sarkozy suggests, if they refuse, they are free to leave France.
That Sarkozy will be president is excellent news for the West. Yet, the job of restoring France to its preeminence in the international scene requires that the French also elect pro-Sarkozy politicians to the French National Assembly in 2007 June.
Much work remains to be done to restore France to its status as an economic and cultural superpower. We have taken the first step.
well, france is my second favorite country after russia.
assuming sarkozy wins, i have a hunch that he will become another angela merkel... washington saw merkel as someone who will bring germany farther from russia and closer to the u.s., reversing the trend set by her predecessor... to the astonishment of many, this hasn't happened and germany is pursuing strategic bilateral relations with as stronger russia.
i think sarkozy will be the same way. pundits in washington think he is pro-american, but he will prove to be pro-france, which means being pro-russia because russia is at the head of a pole that could balance american unilateralism. american unilateralism is a grave threat to freedom, peace, and prosperity to all countries, france included and sarkozy will join germany, italy, spain, greece, and hungary against american unilateralism in europe.
We are very excited to get results of the election and are wishing very much that Mr Sarkozy will be our next President !
Vive Nicolas Sarkozy, Vive la République and Vive France !!!
We are very impatient to get results of the election and wishing very much that Mr Sarkozy will be our next President.
Vive Nicolas Sarkozy and Vive la France !!!!
If you are a French citizen, please remember to vote in the French election. It is vitally important for the future of, not only France, but also our entire Western society.
Nicolas Sarkozy wants to build France into an integrated society firmly grounded in Western values. Under his leadership (and under the assumption that the French shall vote likeminded people into the French parliament), France will return to its proper place as an economic and cultural powerhouse.
By contrast, Ségolène Royal wants to build a divided France based upon two moralities: Western values and Islamic values. She believes that both system of values are equally good, and she advocates tolerance and respect for Islamic oppression of women. In fact, she relishes the idea of Islamic thugs rioting after Sarkozy wins the election. That is the system of values which she advocates. Reprehensible. Disgusting.
Note that Sarkozy encourages assimilation: the immigrants should learn Western values. Yet, he is not a neoconservative. He opposes the war in Iraq. Also, he supports free trade with only other free markets. The typical American neoconservative is a heartless, greedy thug who advocates free trade with non-free markets. Non-free markets like India and China drives down the quality of life in the USA. For example, due to neoconservative bigots in the Congress, melamine from China has entered the American food supply.
Sarkozy's approach to free trade is the right way. In his way, France enjoys the benefits of globalization, yet his approach protects the quality of life in our traditional Western society.
France needs Sarkozy. In fact, even the USA needs Sarkozy, the moderate populist. We Americans need Sarkozy to protect us from our own neoconservatives.
The televised debate between Ségolène Royal and Nicolas Sarkozy means nothing. Both politicians are simply presenting what they have rehearsed.
Do not judge them by this farce called debate. Rather, judge them by the policies that they have supported in the past. The past predicts well the future.
Royal has consistently supported the concept of two separate French societies: one based on Western values and one based on Islamic values. She has consistently demanded that we respect the Islamic values dictated by Sharia Law. One Islamic value is brutalizing women.
Sarkozy, by contrast, has consistently insisted that Islamic immigrants learn and support Western values. One Western value is equality for women.
If you believe that the future is Islamic values and a divided France, then you should vote for Royal.
If you believe that the future is Western values and a France united upon Western values, then vote for Sarkozy.
Definitely I will vote for Nicolas Sarkozy ! He is the man we need in France. We don't want that barbie girl called Segolene who knows everything about nothing !!!
Ségolène Royal is likely the strongest supporter of multicultural pluralism in the European Union. Here, "pluralism" means values (like honor killings and oppression of women) that are diametrically opposed to Western values. Royal believes that Western values and Islamic values (like those in Sharia Law) should be given equal status and equal respect in France -- and throughout the European Union.
Royal's brand of liberalism is shocking. Equally shocking is her sudden "change of face" during the election. She asks everyone to sing the French national anthem. However, that face is not her real face. Her real face is the policies that she has supported throughout her political career. She has always supported multicultural pluralism. She has always supported giving equal status to both Western values and Islamic values.
By contrast, Nicolas Sarkozy supports only Western values. His vision is that if you choose to live in France, then you should embrace Western values even though you may choose to reject French cuisine. The food that you eat is not important. What is important is that you strongly support civil rights -- and, especially, the rights of women.
This kind of assimilation is well-known throughout the West. This assimilation strengthens Western society. In fact, some of the toughest, strongest Americans who fought the Axis Powers (e.g., Japan) in World War II were -- Americans of Japanese ancestry. The 442 battalion of the American army consisted only of Japanese-Americans and was one of the most decorated battalions in World War II. They fought with distinction and honor in defending Western values.
If Japanese-Americans had acted in the way that Ségolène Royal advocates, then they would have helped Japan to fight the Americans in World War II. Ségolène Royal is utterly despicable.
Sarkozy is not Jewish, so stop posting antisemtic comments.
Atheist in boston:
You are extremely bigotted in all your comments. Plus you clearly have no idea what you are talking about when you speak of the french arabic population or of Segolene Royal being in favour of honour killings and so on. So maybe you should stop posting until you find out a tad more about the subject matter.
Sarkozy is JEWISH, that means he will have more loyalty to israel than france.
This will lead to the decline of france. Frnce will be controlled by AIPAC just like the US now.
Sarkozy is JEWISH, that means he will have more loyalty to israel than france.
This will lead to the decline of france. Frnce will be controlled by AIPAC just like the US now.
Sarkozy is JEWISH, that means he will have more loyalty to israel than france.
This will lead to the decline of france. Frnce will be controlled by AIPAC just like the US now.
Most Islamic Arabs with French citizenship consider themselves Arabs first -- and, time permitting, secondarily French. Therein lies the fundamental problem with Islamic bigots in France. They refer to themselves as French-Arabs, not Arab-French. They favor Arab values or Islamic values over French values. In particular, these Islamic bigots support "honor" killings (by which an Arab bigot kills, for example, his sister because she touched the hand of a Swedish man).
Contrast these bigots with Japanese-Americans. Nearly 100% of the Japanese-American population in the USA has committed to assimilation and refer to themselves as Americans of Japanese ancestry or, simply, Japanese-Americans. They never refer to themselves as American-Japanese.
Both the British and the French should slam the immigration door on Muslims and, in particular, Arab Muslims. They destroy the core values of Western society.
I don't know if she's 'doomed', but France is certainly declining - a system that results in persistently high unemployment and low growth doesn't work, period, no matter how desirable it would be if it worked.
The French need to take a hard look at themselves, not just in economic policy but also in terms of racism. I know educated, law-abiding, hard-working French-Arabs who left France for Britain because French employers will not sully their eyes by reading a CV with an Arab name on it, regardless of citizenship. They can get away with it because with such levels of unemployment they can always find some white candidate.
That IS my name, one that I quite like - thank you very much. I notice that you still don't reveal yours.
Assertions that Sarkozy wanted to place his country in a war not in its interest, and that he secretly apologized to a foreign leader (Bush), because Sarkozy has some jewish heritage and "Israel wanted it" are just not that different from similar Nazi assertions of the 1920's. Fella, you're there!
And all that's true even before noting that Sarkozy is a practicing Catholic. It was once a standard deranged argument in this country among the Know Nothings that Catholic politicians took THEIR orders from the Vatican, which quite openly opposed this war. Israel or Rome? Jew or Catholic? How was Mr. Sarkozy to know where to take his orders? It's all so complicated!
McKenna: (like that's your real name) Thank you so for emphasizing my point. Doubling it.
As for your sneer "political and moral decline..." Mine, you mean? Eighth generation American?
Also, whatever group has put forth it's usual instruction to hit the chats for Sarkozy and zionism should scold you. Bringing up Germany is a little heavy handed. A little obvious what you're up to.
Though one knows of course how much you care about French elections.
McKenna: (like that's your real name) Thank you so for emphasizing my point. Doubling it.
As for your sneer "political and moral decline..." Mine, you mean? Eighth generation American?
Also, whatever group has put forth it's usual instruction to hit the chats for Sarkozy and zionism should scold you. Bringing up Germany is a little heavy handed. A little obvious what you're up to.
Though one knows of course how much you care about French elections.
So you think (and have the chutzpah to write in public, not under your own name!) that jews take their orders from Israel? Perhaps you also think that it is OF COURSE TRUE that the jews caused the German economic problems of the 1920's, as a certain mustachioed Austrian trend spotter argued at the time.
Signs of mental and political decline? We need look no further.
Royal's charge that Sarkozy apologized to Bush for France's not joining the US in the Iraq war IS OF COURSE TRUE. Israel wanted that war and Sarkozy is a Jew. That some of the posters here are screaming about it is pure proof. This is only a taste of what is to come of the French are so unwise as to elect Sarkozy. Surely they won't.
Today's news brings word that Ségolène Royal has accused Nicolas Sarkozy of having “apologized” to President Bush for France’s decision not to back the United States militarily in Iraq - despite Sarkozy's consistent support for Chirac on the substance of this issue (although not Chirac's stroke-induced formal ham-handedness). Asked if the Socialist Party had any evidence that Mr. Sarkozy had “apologized” for not sending troops to Iraq, Arnaud Montebourg, a spokesman for Ms. Royal, said that the "evidence" was that Sarkozy shook Bush's hand on a Washington visit: “These are facts. How do you want Mr. Bush to shake the hand of a leader without some sort of opening on his part?” In other words, there is no evidence.
That Ségolène Royal thinks that she can close the yawning vote gap between herself and her electoral opponent by fabricating such a story is good evidence that she, at least, is convinced that France and French voters are in steep decline, at least mentally. With her enormous number of sometimes hilarious mistakes in this campaign, Ms. Royal has given cause to many French people of all political stripes to openly accuse her of "stupidity" (perhaps the worst thing that can be hurled at a French candidate). This most recent fabrication is damning evidence of Ms. Royal's apparent conviction that it is French voters who are "stupid."
France and French voters are not as stupid as Ms. Royal is convinced they are. She will not be President of France. But the fact that she has got as far as she has is harsh evidence of France's past and likely future decline.
Ségolène Royal openly supports Islam in all its facets. Specifically, she believes that France should tolerate honor killings and the oppression of women living in the Islamic slums of France. Royal believes that we must respect all cultures and all religions, regardless of how oppressive they might be.
By contrast, Nicolas Sarkozy condemns the oppression of women. He condemns honor killings. He believes that the Islamic bigots in France should leave France if they refuse to respect cherished Western values like civil rights.
France and other European countries are wonderful places to visit as they each offer a different set of values that they live by which vary between themselves more than they can be used to differentiate them from the US.
Life for the individual is not easy in France. The "free" health care mentioned does not come cheap - your pay is docked for a day or two for each few days of minor health related problems. For all the vaunted benefits of extaravagant social spending, it was instructive to hear propective French businessman wanting to immigrate to England as they could not get any business started in France for several months (NPR report on French elections).
Given all that, society in France remains remarkably multi-ethnic, specially in the south. Yes there is xenophobia, but there is also acceptance. Almost all countries in Europe have been condemned to be doomed at one time or the other in the past few decades (UK in the 70's, Germany in the 90's and early 2000's; Sweden currently). They have all come back or will probably do so soon. French technology is to be seen to be believed - probably the right regulatory climate may emerge (soon or maybe not) for them to show their flair for invention and innovation and refute any question of being doomed.
Has any one noticed that the jewish neocons who served Israel's push to war are now slowly but surely being taken down now ? Look at the DOD investigation of Feith, Libby's conviction, Wolfowitz WB problems ...Perle piloried in the major press even has he tries to resurrect his sorid, sorry necon reputation? SARKOZY, with no
experience or place to speak of in French government or history is placed where he is by the same busy zionists. Always at work. Who says there are no Elders? And if the French are uninformed enough to elect him (surely not)
there will be similar machinations when the the French catch on. Oh, the constant plottings of the zionists. They're determined next to start a revolution in Russia. Have you heard?
As an American, I think the question of French decline is fair, as a response to other postings. American decline is discussed everywhere, especially in France (which I visit and within whom I have quite a few friends for a "monolinguist"). Frankly, I've agreed with them recently. America certainly did decline when Bush took office and I immediately got on my roll to my international contacts for their take. Yes, when Bush was elected, America was doomed to decline. Bush just doesn't know enough about global politics. And it's always better to get the opinion from someone outside looking in. We tend to get a rosy picture inside the country.
The question above is worded correctly. The problem is that for us "uncultured outsiders" (thank you all for assuming my ignorance based on where I live, it's lent much credence to your insults based on ignorance) and even in the French media, this election looks an awful lot like one of ours. Sarkozy looks like a half-crazy neoconservative and Royal's critics mutter about incompetance, wishful thinking, and the like. That sounds an awful lot like the last few elections with Bush the Jr.
Like it or not, the problems this time around are difficult to answer. If the unrest of muslim immigrants are the problem, what is the solution? It requires a lot of finesse, a lot of respect, and a lot of reputation. How do you appeal to the muslim immigrants for patience without specifically targeting them and driving up the resentment? The economy is ALWAYS a muddy issue. How do you inspire the working class? How does your social system prop up the unfortunate while still trying not to make them permanently "unfortunate." And remember that "unfortunate" people also can vote.
Is France doomed to a decline? It's sure possible. Nobody is seriously suggesting that it is doomed to failure. My French friends (especially Helene out there in Lille, shout out) are more worried about what they'll do after college, what their business is going to do over summer, and, shall I say, personal issues than the ongoing election war. Seriously, decline? Maybe, but there's nothing on the plate that's going to destroy France in the next few years. And even if France does go into decline in some kind of United States style, obviously they won't stay there. The United States isn't likely to either. We've got an election coming up ourselves to try and dig out of the hole we've dug into.
Maybe France is already IN decline and the incoming President will bring them out. Declines are always subjective. France may come out of a decline it never knew it was in. Unlikely, though, since Paris was perfectly fine the last time I went there. A little edgy with the violence, but who wouldn't be?
In the end, it's something we have to wait and see. All this doom- and boom-speak is great before the election, but we'll see what's going on after it's all said and done and the dust settles. The decline is in a lot of places, and where France may or may not be declining differs from candidate to candidate. After all this campaigning, they've got a whole cycle to bring their country back from the brink of whatever oblivion they're campaigning against.
Then they can pound THAT rhetoric into your head over the next election cycle. Whether or not France is declining, you can always feel good that, no matter what, the next election cycle will be ALL about how candidate X got France out of it. Joy...
i think this is from the bible. one day a powerful king wanted to learn the one law that would always apply to everything. he called in his advisors and demanded the answer. after a time he called them in again and when they did not know the answer he killed them and went to another group. soon no one wanted to be the kings advisor, but he was the king and if he said you were picked, you were picked. again he posed the question and waited for an answer to the question, what is the one law that will apply all the time to eveything. this time the advisor said "AND THIS TOO SHALL PASS". he served his king for the rest of his life.
nothing stays the same, not the boundries of a tribe, city, state or country. not the people or family that runs it, nor the political system that controls it. not even the earth stays the same. everything changes because THIS TOO SHALL PASS.
Sarkozy was certainly not acting like a 'moderate populist'in calling the slum youth "racailles"
(riff-raff). That population has since become very aware of its' voting power and their motto is that Sarkozy=Iznogood.
France will be alright. They know the value of the social side and the grudingly will admit to the economic changes required. The sadness is in how they surrender to it.
But France isn't flesh and blood, only it peoples and people get by. The revolution is not a failure. It is a dream before its time.
France will be alright. They know the value of the social side and the grudingly will admit to the economic changes required. The sadness is in how they surrender to it.
But France isn't flesh and blood, only it peoples and people get by. The revolution is not a failure. It is a dream before its time.
Sarkozy opposed and still opposes the American invasion of Iraq. Sarkozy is not a neoconservative.
He is a moderate populist. He favors uplifting the common person by reviving France as an economic powerhouse. His plan is right for France.
Various bigots are trying to paint him as a neoconservative because these bigots want him to lose in the run-off election. The bigots favor the open-door policy favored by Royal. The bigots want France to be overrun by Islamic bigots and Turks.
NEOCON -
Now I've heard that Sarkozy has been accused of wanting to dismantle some of the social safety net in France and to have closer, friendlier, ties with the U.S. and U.K. But I have never heard that he was friends with our idiot "president" and the nutjobs that are American NeoConservatives. Do you have some sort of statement Sarkozy made or is there something to this? This sounds a bit like hyperboly to me, but I really would like to know.
Sarkozy is a NEOCON, a Bushie in that respect. If he is elected the French will quickly find themselves in Lebanon, or Syria, or wherever the israelis want.
It is precisely because of this same reason that 'France is on decline' that 'who the next French president would be' becomes all the more important an issue.
The world cannot ignore the profound impact of France on global economy, civil societies and world politics.
Today's geopolitical realities do not let anybody rejoice the weakening of any country as it spells grave dangers for people - its citizens in particular and the world at large.
It is precisely because of the same reason that France is on decline that who the next French president would be becomes all the more important an issue.
The world cannot ignore the importance of France on the global scene in terms of its profound impact economically, socially and politically.
The geopolitical realities of today are such that the weakening of any strong country spells more dangers for people - its citizens in particular and the world population at large.
It is precisely because of the same reason that France is on decline that who the next French president would be becomes all the more important an issue.
The world cannot ignore the importance of France on the global scene in terms of its profound impact economically, socially and politically.
The geopolitical realities of today are such that the weakening of any strong country spells more dangers for people - its citizens in particular and the world population at large.
I dont know what I think about a democracy where an elected leader is only truly supported by 18-25% of the population.
The United States has had a divider in politics for the last 6 1/2 years yet Jacques Chirac has been in the inner circle of leadership for over 20.
Is France doomed? The western world must recognize that there is little growth left int heir economies and that the future is in Asia (India, China, etc) and get over the romanticism that they are the most dominant countries in the world. Western Europe cant deal with the fact that they cannot have their cake and eat it too; they cant have their selfish policies against immigrants and keep their leisurely 25 hour work week including every benefit Mitterand could conceive. France, almost more than any, will decline as the developing world takes not only their manufacturing jobs but also their beloved intellectual jobs. What happened to the EU and its promise of grandeur? The French people will not even accept the Constitution, that while being one of the main architects and "beneficiaries".
The fact that France considers itself a major player in world politics yet refuses to defuse problems it created in its formal colonies in Africa shows its true weakness and future. It is and will continue to be a country of talk and little action. Say what you want about American foreign policy and the abominable war in Iraq, but at least past and future presidents are ready for some action if needed. How many french troops were in Bosnia, Rwanda, Ethiopia, etc?
France has declined and will continue to decline. As an American, I do not want nor would I want any part of the French system of democracy in my country.
For those uglies who keep pointing out that there are many Muslims in France, and insinuate that's a terrible thing...perhaps you've missed the reality that France has the largest jewish population in Europe. And that most of the world considers that a minus...is NOT considered a bonus to say the least. Anti-semitism is rife in france. And in Europe, the west generally, and Asia, and.
Get wise.
Letmegetthisstraight:
You can't say that Sarko is first generation hungarian immigrant. Only his father was. And his mother is not a Greek Jewess. His mother's father was a Greek Jew that happen to convert to catholicism by the way...
All in all, this is pretty common in France. Lots of people have one or two foreign born grand-parents (3 for Sarko)
Yousuf Hashmi :
"...This is true that since last 20 years France role in core engineering production and international politics is declining..."
What? I'm an engineer. When was in France, I was demonstrating the newest instrumentation for installing and maintaining optical fiber, rf, and other sorts of communications networks. Now, I'm an American, with with more than 50 patents, and I worked for some of the U.S.'s premier companies and I've got to tell you I was flat out emabarrased. The French are far ahead of us with chip and wafer and communications and package marking and printing technologies. If they play it right, the French will leave behind in the dirt. Actually, this is true of the Scandinavian countries, too; especially Denmark and Sweden. They are inventive and original, produce top quality goods, have motivatative and very smart and hard working employees who aren't afraid of some corporate swine outsourcing their job or replacing them with an Indian indenured servant. The future, my friend, IS in France and Sweden and Denmark. The U.S., England, and Germany have permitted their governments and corporations to sell their future, bargain it away for short term gains by investors qand the wealthy. France watches those scumbags like the bugs they are, which explains why they are so loatheed and defamed by the media and right wing nuts over here. The last laugh will be France's burying us.
The choice of France's next President is of course of importance to the world. France has historically held a powerful position in geopolitics and continues to do so, albeit with a declining level of influence. But remember that France is one of the key members of the EU, an organisation that holds great influence worldwide. I cannot speak for one or other of the candidates in the second round, but can predict that France under Sarkozy or Royal will likely play a more important role than has been the case under Chirac.
This is true that since last 20 years France role in core engineering production and international politics is declining.
This is itself not a major problem. France exploring its strength on rich agriculture products and its dominance or art culture and life style.
So far out siders living thousands miles away from the shores of France it does not matter who will be the next president of France.
France has a core strength of a highly educated work force as well as one of the best infra structure avilable. Therefore the country have all the potential to rise and become a leading member of EU.
This question seems to have attracted a lot of attention and brought out of the numerous participants reactions which emanate from their various nationalities, religions and political affinities. In other word, instead of expressing opinions which come from serious thinking and objective observations, each one finds a forum to express his subjective reactions, which automatically create an antagonistic atmosphere, which is far from being constructive, because finally each one will remain adamant that he has the 'truth'.
One will never really have a valid view if he does not try to remain above all the 'truths' which are being thrown around. In my opinion, the only real truth is humanity which, unfortunately, has been overpowered by the new 'truth', money and power. Thus whilst a human is more important than anything else, we have put material elements above him. This is creating the world we are all on, and which cannot find a way to have us all live in liberty, equality and fraternity. We can still hope!
Like the Chinese, the Turks block web sites. Also, the Turkish government tried to imprison the Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk for the "crime" of insulting Turkish society.
The Turks want us to respect how they suppress human rights. We respect them.
At the same time, we want the Turks to respect our right to preserve Western values. We have every right to prevent Western values (in Europe) from being contaminated by Turkish or Islamic values.
Sarkozy is right on the mark about trying to restrict immigration into France and about trying to prohibit Turkey from entering the European Union (EU). We should condemn Washington for trying to pressure France (and the rest of the EU) into admitting Turkey into the EU.
The last 6 years has demonstrated that Washington is incompetent on matters of foreign policy.
"Here's one reply from a Frenchman that does not address the United States: "France rated first in a 'quality of life' survey held by British International Living magazine for the last 2 years. Doomed? Doomed to free health care and education by a socially progressive electorate which refuses to give up certain rights maybe?"
Well, it's certainly a first baby step for at least one frenchman to address the question without direct reference to the United States (indirect references remain a question between frenchman and his creator).
I don't recall an international accord that made BIL surveys of its readers much evidence of anything. I do recall that a great many hi-profile EU worthies met a while ago and cobbled up the hilarious French-government propelled "Lisbon Accord" that proposed that Europe would become the world's best source of intellectual capital and technological innovation. Nobody is really talking about the Lisbon Accord these days, even (or especially) in France, except as a source of embarrassment. So by at least this one of its own measure of what matters, France seems to be in serious decline - and accepts that there is much more to come.
Whether "free" medical care or other French social policies are "progressive" - or merely constitutes the results of the usual rent seeking special interest legislation - would seem to require appeal to some kind of standard of "progressiveness," which is not provided. Certainly such policies do not seem conducive to general economic vitality. Certainly it is a stretch to suggest that the intentions of the great majority of French voters who caused such policies to be put in place were anything but grubby rent seeking.
By way of measuring likely "progressive" intentions: Do any significant number of the French actually give anything substantial to any charity worthy of the name?
To LetMeGetThiStraight: Why bring up the point that Goerge Washington was a slave-owner. Who doesn't know that already and who cares. What does that have to do with France. This may come as a surprise to you, but in 1776, for someone born into the Virginian aristocracy, and despite the fact the slavery was awful, it was actually possible to have slaves working on your plantation and still be a noble individual in other aspects of your life.
About France: However, you are right about France saving our butts in the revolutionary war, just like we saved theirs later on. Part of the problem between the US and France is people in both countries are stridently patriotic about their county (at least many of us are) and see their country as the one qualified to lead other nations in world affairs. Remember that for a long time, French was the language of diplomacy. There are attitudes of French politicians that bug me and I wish French people didn't feel so patriotically competitive with us. However, after reading about Phillip Augusts' struggle with England, and reading about how bravely the French fought along-side us in the Korean war, I have to conclude that they are not panzies, and I can only dislike French people the way I dislike Giant's fans, in a competitive, good-natured way.
The French governmental system has it's good points, and the government is to be commended for avoiding the siren song of US dollars into Iraq and Afghanistan, that has consumed NATO and the US and Canada...however, the French income tax system makes even the USA system look good. Until France fixes that, they will stagnate in the personal savings department. Royal has better ideas on what a democracy should be, yet she is a hard core socialist; Sarkozy is a bigot, and probably will not be able to change the tax system in a meaningful way...tough choices
George Robertson : "A resurgent France? Quelle drole !! (That's "what a laugh" in froggie.)"
George, you'd do better with "Quelle blague!"... No need to try so hard, if you don't know the language. It only makes one wonder whether you know what you are talking about...
Ah, I forget to add that I don't live in France but it is my home abroad... I don't like Sarkozy he's a NeoCon with a French passport. Furthermore he'll do or say anything to get a vote - sound familiar. When his model/actress wife committed adultery last year, he turned around and got himself a mistress. A trait of a vengeful persona. Also, it is widely reported that he pleaed with his wife before the campaign started to reconcile, his excuse was for the sake of their children - we think for his polotical career.
Royal isn't that fantastic in my opinion but my family that are nationals will vote for her - I don't know if I would even if I could - I am an American national.
For those who predict an easy victory for either of the two - guess agian.
Sarkozy is a first generation Hungarian immigrants son and his mother is a Greek Jewess. There has never been anyone elected president of the republic who is not at least 4 or 5 generations implanted. Also one final notation there are an estimated 500 000 Jews in France, lots of anti-sentism and there are about 8 million Muslims. The winner will need about 7 -10 million votes from the center to win - DO the math.
France is a vibrant country and the people gracious. In 2000 fleeing the Bush and Co. coup, I an American national, veteran and CNN journlaist - predicting the deplorable decline of American values under a Bush administation, packed-up and moved to Paris. There are many things which I disagree with about the French but there are also many things which I disagree with about my mother country as well. Racism is rampart in the USA, period no discussion, I lived it. What upsets me sometimes is reading arrogant statements of the KOOL-AID drinkers and FREEDOM FRIES advocates. Whilst it is true the USA rescued France during WWI and WWII - I as a history buff remind my fellow countrymen that if not for the FRENCH during the battle of Yorktown, THERE WOULD BE NO USA. Also, General George Washingtion, president of our country and slaveowner would perhaps have been murdered which was the satus quo for captured colonist. I have noticed reading various post that HISTORY is not apparently a strong study of BUSH nor of his follwers. To reiterate, if not for the French blockade of the harbor in Yorktown, Lord Cornwallis' forces would have destoyed General Washington and the dreams of the USA. The General whose back was to the sea as Lord Cornwallis' forces advanced anticapting the Royal Navy Fleet - blocked by France - had no avenue of escape nor a plan B. In fact there is a famous painting all of you should study in the US National Archives of this historical event. Take a close examination of the ships mast in the harbor - Fleur de Lys - that would be FRENCH.
In esscence stop the anti-France rhetoric and the same admonishment goes to the ant-American sentiments offered-up by the French.
THAT QUESTION had to have come from Ignatius. It is disgusting. There are many who believe the US's decline in the world and imorality in the war far surpasses any French problem.
The tenor of this whole subject is rife with anti muslim stuff...snide and what we've seen before on certain subjects....with vicioius attacks on Royal (not many accurate) But no one will mention that Sarky is a Jew. Is nobody proud? This is ugly. And all too typical.
Do you know that a laid-off French worker gets 2 years of salary? Not even the Swedes do that, and at least they (the Swedes) make people re-train into another job in order to receive extended unemployment compensation. No wonder no French company wants to take on new staff. Every French government that has tried to take on the radical left to change these and other obsurdities has been forced to back down by a radical left wing. A resurgent France? Quelle drole !! (That's "what a laugh" in froggie.)
Demography may not be destiny, but it is highly influential. Large pools of third world folk inside and outside of France have been led to believe that France (or the West, in general) is a major source of their misery, and they have been encouraged to arrive at this belief by "leaders" in their countries, various elites who clamp on their countries self-imposed poverty and self-imposed oppression and who are skilled in scapegoating. Added to that reality is the fact that now few French believe in anything, including the idea of "French culture," a belief that once cushioned France's geopolitical decline. (A warm feeling about being "European" just doesn't cut it.) Result: possible near-term catastrophe. Sarkozy may be able to reverse these realities, but he faces immediate and enormous challenges.
It takes some work, but you can figure it out. Specifically, look at table 7.
Where did I ever state I was pro gun control? Go back and read my post. I never said any such thing. All I did was put out statistics.
That the US has a high homicide rate is just a fact. People could argue over why the rate is so high and I can only assume the anti gun lobby blames it all on fire arms. Since I'm just a litle skeptical I have my doubts any one factor is to blame for this statistic. Having said this we still need to put it in perspective. The US rates 23rd in the world in per capita homicides. As a citizen you're 4 times more likely to be murdered in the US then in France. However, you're 15 times less likely to be murdered in the US then in Columbia.
PS: in a previous post Tom Wonacott accused me of being a member of the NRA. I guess I've now been accused of being on both sides:)
France is not doomed, of course, but it is going through a profound crisis. Whether this crisis will be going on and deepening for at least the next five years is a question to be decided by this election. What is at stake here is tremendously important for France, but also for Europe, the United States and the West as a whole. France is and will remain a key player in the European Union. France is also a key partner for the U.S., probably more solid than it seems, but certainly less than it should be. In a multipolar world an even stronger alliance of the West will be necessary not only between the governments but between the nations. There was always more than a bit of a rivalry between France and the U.S. and it's not a bad thing as long as there is no hatred. Unfortunately a part of the French Left, but an influential one, has turned anti-americanism into a rotten ideology. Only Nicolas Sarkozy can solve this problem. Not only by showing his admiration and good feelings towards America (a pretty courageous and risky stance by the way) but by re-energizing France,by giving the Frenchs more reasons to be proud of themselves. Royal is telling people that they are smart and that whathever they do is great. Sarkozy is telling them that they could do better. He is a leader, she is not. The Frenchs are arrogant and bitter because they feel being weaker. A stronger France would be a better partner in a necessary partnership.
This conversation is getting interesting. I am particularly interested in getting at what France is--the degree to which it is an economical event in contrast to an intellectual, artistic, cultural event. I wrote that what France has always seemed to me is a cultural event more than anything else and that perhaps this cultural event was neither made nor can be rescued by political methods (in short, it was a difficult to describe unconscious process). But of course politics must have entered the picture and that people are so aware of a cultural event as distinguished from a political cannot help but result in politics entering the picture to preserve trajectory of culture.
The point is France seems to be declining in the cultural sense, is spoken of now in the cultural sense as a place of people of good health, as a place where people value life over work, etc. (instead of cultural in the sense of a profound intellectual and artistic thrust). So is this new cultural understanding something as powerful and inevitable as the old culture of France or will France become increasingly political and more of an economic event (rather than cultural) to preserve at least something of France? With Sarkozy--and I hope he wins--we see an increased emphasis on the economical over the cultural (and with Royal we see no real championing of the cultural either) and the question should be asked if this is all France can do--if despite herself she must now become predominantly economical and political over the cultural.
And what does this mean? Does this not automatically mean decline? Is it not more exalted for a country that it can emphasize the cultural--its highest achievements--over mere economics? It seems France wants to remain a cultural force but events on the ground suggest cultural precedents are giving way to brute economics and politics...
And contrast this with the United States. The U.S. has always been about money money money. So does this mean the U.S. has never really forged itself as a cultural event and must do so or does it mean that the U.S. has always been in the odd state of ascending without really being cultural? Or is the U.S. just cultural in a different sense?
Just trying to contrast the cultural with the economic and seeking clues about how to determine decline.
Tonight Segolene gave a long speech in Montpellier and Sarkosy gave also a long speech in Rouen.
If you heard them or if you can have a possibility to obtain the contents of these speeches, you will have the replies to all your questions. Good luck.
The french thought that Iraq was a mistake- they agreed with the war in Afghanistan and are fighting there. Turns out they were right about Afghanistan.
Mush of Europe suffers from underemployment of the young. This leads to policies encouraging long schooling and less than forty hour work weeks- attemting to creat jobs on the one hand and hold young people out of the labor market on the other. Within a few years this will all start to change as the postwar generation begins retirement.
Most who babble on about the expensive social net in Europe know nothing about it- and can't even summarize govt. expenses for those countries with our own- program by program..
Too much un supported opinion and few if any facts lead to worthless discussion.
The french thought that Iraq was a mistake- they agreed with the war in Afghanistan and are fighting there. Turns out they were right about Afghanistan.
Mush of Europe suffers from underemployment of the young. This leads to policies encouraging long schooling and less than forty hour work weeks- attemting to creat jobs on the one hand and hold young people out of the labor market on the other. Within a few years this will all start to change as the postwar generation begins retirement.
Most who babble on about the expensive social net in Europe know nothing about it- and can't even summarize govt. expenses for those countries with our own- program by program..
Too much un supported opinion and few if any facts lead to worthless discussion.
The question is ridiculous on face value. The very same question was asked in the US's 2000 Presidential election, with the media and American public essentially saying (through polling during a time of peace and economic prosperity) that it didn't matter who lead the US.
Six years later, it's painfully difficult to say that the 2000 choice for leadership didn't matter. France is a nuclear power, a major diplomatic player with a seat on the Security Council, and a substantial part of the EU's economy. Social problems abound, as in any country, and difficult decisions will need to be made. But "doomed to decline?" Please. Of course it matters.
No children. French women are not having kids. Therefore France will cease to exist fairly soon.
Too many Muslims. Who are having children. And will turn what was "France" into Algeria North.
Gone: Wine, cheese, art (it's not Islamic), the Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame (soon to be a mosque), the Louvre (not Islamic), Versailles, the Arc de Triomphe.
The only question is WHEN will Muslims overthrow the pathetic French governments and institute Sharia?
My response:
First of all, France women are some of the most fertile in Europe and have many more children than most other European countries.
Second, most muslims are not terrorists, what is publicized in the papers represents the acts of a violent few.
One of the strongest elements of French life is their secular government and social life. The Enlightenment really did influence people and they pulled their head out of the Middle Ages.
I suggest you do the same. Ignorance will get you George Bush and Freedom Fries. Have a good day, and God bless Bill Clinton, a relaxed man with his finger on the nuclear button.
Readers’ Responses to Our Question (161)
"We have taken the first step." lol. the neocons? who is we?
once again, i doubt very much that sarkozy will side with the u.s. and become an american stooge a la blair. the e.u., more and more, is distancing itself from the u.s. i think that this will continue.
i do agree though that france's economy will strengthen in the coming years, but some of the stuff that neocons wan't to impose upon france like 60 hour work weeks and more "pro-corporation social policies" won't happen.
france is a perennial power, its civilization is strong, and its cultural needs no adjustment by the world bank or washington.
i saw paris je t'aime on friday and it was an excellent film, plus there are a few more excellent french films out now that i'm plannning to see. something like 3 or 4. i don't remember so many french films out in the u.s. market at the same time ever before.
May 6, 2007 6:00 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Nicolas Sarkozy has won the election. He will be the next president of France. The French citizens support his idea that immigrants should identify with Western values. As Sarkozy suggests, if they refuse, they are free to leave France.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/06/AR2007050600216.html?hpid=topnews
That Sarkozy will be president is excellent news for the West. Yet, the job of restoring France to its preeminence in the international scene requires that the French also elect pro-Sarkozy politicians to the French National Assembly in 2007 June.
Much work remains to be done to restore France to its status as an economic and cultural superpower. We have taken the first step.
May 6, 2007 3:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
well, france is my second favorite country after russia.
assuming sarkozy wins, i have a hunch that he will become another angela merkel... washington saw merkel as someone who will bring germany farther from russia and closer to the u.s., reversing the trend set by her predecessor... to the astonishment of many, this hasn't happened and germany is pursuing strategic bilateral relations with as stronger russia.
i think sarkozy will be the same way. pundits in washington think he is pro-american, but he will prove to be pro-france, which means being pro-russia because russia is at the head of a pole that could balance american unilateralism. american unilateralism is a grave threat to freedom, peace, and prosperity to all countries, france included and sarkozy will join germany, italy, spain, greece, and hungary against american unilateralism in europe.
May 6, 2007 12:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
We are very excited to get results of the election and are wishing very much that Mr Sarkozy will be our next President !
Vive Nicolas Sarkozy, Vive la République and Vive France !!!
May 6, 2007 11:06 AM | Report Offensive Comments
We are very impatient to get results of the election and wishing very much that Mr Sarkozy will be our next President.
Vive Nicolas Sarkozy and Vive la France !!!!
May 6, 2007 11:04 AM | Report Offensive Comments
If you are a French citizen, please remember to vote in the French election. It is vitally important for the future of, not only France, but also our entire Western society.
Nicolas Sarkozy wants to build France into an integrated society firmly grounded in Western values. Under his leadership (and under the assumption that the French shall vote likeminded people into the French parliament), France will return to its proper place as an economic and cultural powerhouse.
By contrast, Ségolène Royal wants to build a divided France based upon two moralities: Western values and Islamic values. She believes that both system of values are equally good, and she advocates tolerance and respect for Islamic oppression of women. In fact, she relishes the idea of Islamic thugs rioting after Sarkozy wins the election. That is the system of values which she advocates. Reprehensible. Disgusting.
Note that Sarkozy encourages assimilation: the immigrants should learn Western values. Yet, he is not a neoconservative. He opposes the war in Iraq. Also, he supports free trade with only other free markets. The typical American neoconservative is a heartless, greedy thug who advocates free trade with non-free markets. Non-free markets like India and China drives down the quality of life in the USA. For example, due to neoconservative bigots in the Congress, melamine from China has entered the American food supply.
Sarkozy's approach to free trade is the right way. In his way, France enjoys the benefits of globalization, yet his approach protects the quality of life in our traditional Western society.
France needs Sarkozy. In fact, even the USA needs Sarkozy, the moderate populist. We Americans need Sarkozy to protect us from our own neoconservatives.
Viva la France!
May 5, 2007 3:08 PM | Report Offensive Comments
The televised debate between Ségolène Royal and Nicolas Sarkozy means nothing. Both politicians are simply presenting what they have rehearsed.
Do not judge them by this farce called debate. Rather, judge them by the policies that they have supported in the past. The past predicts well the future.
Royal has consistently supported the concept of two separate French societies: one based on Western values and one based on Islamic values. She has consistently demanded that we respect the Islamic values dictated by Sharia Law. One Islamic value is brutalizing women.
Sarkozy, by contrast, has consistently insisted that Islamic immigrants learn and support Western values. One Western value is equality for women.
If you believe that the future is Islamic values and a divided France, then you should vote for Royal.
If you believe that the future is Western values and a France united upon Western values, then vote for Sarkozy.
May 3, 2007 2:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
One more thing, Nicolas Sarkozy is not Jewish and was born in Paris.
You can have a look on the below link that gives us real information on him
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_Sarkozy
May 2, 2007 2:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Definitely I will vote for Nicolas Sarkozy ! He is the man we need in France. We don't want that barbie girl called Segolene who knows everything about nothing !!!
May 2, 2007 2:09 PM | Report Offensive Comments
i support royal. she is very sexy and thats whats counts in the end.
April 30, 2007 1:28 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Ségolène Royal is likely the strongest supporter of multicultural pluralism in the European Union. Here, "pluralism" means values (like honor killings and oppression of women) that are diametrically opposed to Western values. Royal believes that Western values and Islamic values (like those in Sharia Law) should be given equal status and equal respect in France -- and throughout the European Union.
Royal's brand of liberalism is shocking. Equally shocking is her sudden "change of face" during the election. She asks everyone to sing the French national anthem. However, that face is not her real face. Her real face is the policies that she has supported throughout her political career. She has always supported multicultural pluralism. She has always supported giving equal status to both Western values and Islamic values.
By contrast, Nicolas Sarkozy supports only Western values. His vision is that if you choose to live in France, then you should embrace Western values even though you may choose to reject French cuisine. The food that you eat is not important. What is important is that you strongly support civil rights -- and, especially, the rights of women.
This kind of assimilation is well-known throughout the West. This assimilation strengthens Western society. In fact, some of the toughest, strongest Americans who fought the Axis Powers (e.g., Japan) in World War II were -- Americans of Japanese ancestry. The 442 battalion of the American army consisted only of Japanese-Americans and was one of the most decorated battalions in World War II. They fought with distinction and honor in defending Western values.
If Japanese-Americans had acted in the way that Ségolène Royal advocates, then they would have helped Japan to fight the Americans in World War II. Ségolène Royal is utterly despicable.
April 30, 2007 12:37 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Sarkozy is not Jewish, so stop posting antisemtic comments.
Atheist in boston:
You are extremely bigotted in all your comments. Plus you clearly have no idea what you are talking about when you speak of the french arabic population or of Segolene Royal being in favour of honour killings and so on. So maybe you should stop posting until you find out a tad more about the subject matter.
April 30, 2007 12:11 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Sarkozy is JEWISH, that means he will have more loyalty to israel than france.
This will lead to the decline of france. Frnce will be controlled by AIPAC just like the US now.
April 28, 2007 11:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Sarkozy is JEWISH, that means he will have more loyalty to israel than france.
This will lead to the decline of france. Frnce will be controlled by AIPAC just like the US now.
April 28, 2007 11:49 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Sarkozy is JEWISH, that means he will have more loyalty to israel than france.
This will lead to the decline of france. Frnce will be controlled by AIPAC just like the US now.
April 28, 2007 11:48 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Most Islamic Arabs with French citizenship consider themselves Arabs first -- and, time permitting, secondarily French. Therein lies the fundamental problem with Islamic bigots in France. They refer to themselves as French-Arabs, not Arab-French. They favor Arab values or Islamic values over French values. In particular, these Islamic bigots support "honor" killings (by which an Arab bigot kills, for example, his sister because she touched the hand of a Swedish man).
Contrast these bigots with Japanese-Americans. Nearly 100% of the Japanese-American population in the USA has committed to assimilation and refer to themselves as Americans of Japanese ancestry or, simply, Japanese-Americans. They never refer to themselves as American-Japanese.
Both the British and the French should slam the immigration door on Muslims and, in particular, Arab Muslims. They destroy the core values of Western society.
April 28, 2007 5:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
I don't know if she's 'doomed', but France is certainly declining - a system that results in persistently high unemployment and low growth doesn't work, period, no matter how desirable it would be if it worked.
The French need to take a hard look at themselves, not just in economic policy but also in terms of racism. I know educated, law-abiding, hard-working French-Arabs who left France for Britain because French employers will not sully their eyes by reading a CV with an Arab name on it, regardless of citizenship. They can get away with it because with such levels of unemployment they can always find some white candidate.
April 28, 2007 12:30 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Mr. Trendspotter,
That IS my name, one that I quite like - thank you very much. I notice that you still don't reveal yours.
Assertions that Sarkozy wanted to place his country in a war not in its interest, and that he secretly apologized to a foreign leader (Bush), because Sarkozy has some jewish heritage and "Israel wanted it" are just not that different from similar Nazi assertions of the 1920's. Fella, you're there!
And all that's true even before noting that Sarkozy is a practicing Catholic. It was once a standard deranged argument in this country among the Know Nothings that Catholic politicians took THEIR orders from the Vatican, which quite openly opposed this war. Israel or Rome? Jew or Catholic? How was Mr. Sarkozy to know where to take his orders? It's all so complicated!
But no doubt you can set me straight.
April 27, 2007 11:55 AM | Report Offensive Comments
McKenna: (like that's your real name) Thank you so for emphasizing my point. Doubling it.
As for your sneer "political and moral decline..." Mine, you mean? Eighth generation American?
Also, whatever group has put forth it's usual instruction to hit the chats for Sarkozy and zionism should scold you. Bringing up Germany is a little heavy handed. A little obvious what you're up to.
Though one knows of course how much you care about French elections.
April 27, 2007 11:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
McKenna: (like that's your real name) Thank you so for emphasizing my point. Doubling it.
As for your sneer "political and moral decline..." Mine, you mean? Eighth generation American?
Also, whatever group has put forth it's usual instruction to hit the chats for Sarkozy and zionism should scold you. Bringing up Germany is a little heavy handed. A little obvious what you're up to.
Though one knows of course how much you care about French elections.
April 27, 2007 11:32 AM | Report Offensive Comments
"Israel wanted that war and Sarkozy is a Jew."
So you think (and have the chutzpah to write in public, not under your own name!) that jews take their orders from Israel? Perhaps you also think that it is OF COURSE TRUE that the jews caused the German economic problems of the 1920's, as a certain mustachioed Austrian trend spotter argued at the time.
Signs of mental and political decline? We need look no further.
April 27, 2007 11:12 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Royal's charge that Sarkozy apologized to Bush for France's not joining the US in the Iraq war IS OF COURSE TRUE. Israel wanted that war and Sarkozy is a Jew. That some of the posters here are screaming about it is pure proof. This is only a taste of what is to come of the French are so unwise as to elect Sarkozy. Surely they won't.
April 27, 2007 10:58 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Today's news brings word that Ségolène Royal has accused Nicolas Sarkozy of having “apologized” to President Bush for France’s decision not to back the United States militarily in Iraq - despite Sarkozy's consistent support for Chirac on the substance of this issue (although not Chirac's stroke-induced formal ham-handedness). Asked if the Socialist Party had any evidence that Mr. Sarkozy had “apologized” for not sending troops to Iraq, Arnaud Montebourg, a spokesman for Ms. Royal, said that the "evidence" was that Sarkozy shook Bush's hand on a Washington visit: “These are facts. How do you want Mr. Bush to shake the hand of a leader without some sort of opening on his part?” In other words, there is no evidence.
That Ségolène Royal thinks that she can close the yawning vote gap between herself and her electoral opponent by fabricating such a story is good evidence that she, at least, is convinced that France and French voters are in steep decline, at least mentally. With her enormous number of sometimes hilarious mistakes in this campaign, Ms. Royal has given cause to many French people of all political stripes to openly accuse her of "stupidity" (perhaps the worst thing that can be hurled at a French candidate). This most recent fabrication is damning evidence of Ms. Royal's apparent conviction that it is French voters who are "stupid."
France and French voters are not as stupid as Ms. Royal is convinced they are. She will not be President of France. But the fact that she has got as far as she has is harsh evidence of France's past and likely future decline.
April 27, 2007 12:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Ségolène Royal openly supports Islam in all its facets. Specifically, she believes that France should tolerate honor killings and the oppression of women living in the Islamic slums of France. Royal believes that we must respect all cultures and all religions, regardless of how oppressive they might be.
By contrast, Nicolas Sarkozy condemns the oppression of women. He condemns honor killings. He believes that the Islamic bigots in France should leave France if they refuse to respect cherished Western values like civil rights.
April 27, 2007 12:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
The french invented butt-banging. THANK YOU!!!
April 26, 2007 11:00 PM | Report Offensive Comments
France and other European countries are wonderful places to visit as they each offer a different set of values that they live by which vary between themselves more than they can be used to differentiate them from the US.
Life for the individual is not easy in France. The "free" health care mentioned does not come cheap - your pay is docked for a day or two for each few days of minor health related problems. For all the vaunted benefits of extaravagant social spending, it was instructive to hear propective French businessman wanting to immigrate to England as they could not get any business started in France for several months (NPR report on French elections).
Given all that, society in France remains remarkably multi-ethnic, specially in the south. Yes there is xenophobia, but there is also acceptance. Almost all countries in Europe have been condemned to be doomed at one time or the other in the past few decades (UK in the 70's, Germany in the 90's and early 2000's; Sweden currently). They have all come back or will probably do so soon. French technology is to be seen to be believed - probably the right regulatory climate may emerge (soon or maybe not) for them to show their flair for invention and innovation and refute any question of being doomed.
Doomed - probably not and maybe neverय़
April 26, 2007 5:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Has any one noticed that the jewish neocons who served Israel's push to war are now slowly but surely being taken down now ? Look at the DOD investigation of Feith, Libby's conviction, Wolfowitz WB problems ...Perle piloried in the major press even has he tries to resurrect his sorid, sorry necon reputation? SARKOZY, with no
experience or place to speak of in French government or history is placed where he is by the same busy zionists. Always at work. Who says there are no Elders? And if the French are uninformed enough to elect him (surely not)
there will be similar machinations when the the French catch on. Oh, the constant plottings of the zionists. They're determined next to start a revolution in Russia. Have you heard?
April 26, 2007 2:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
As an American, I think the question of French decline is fair, as a response to other postings. American decline is discussed everywhere, especially in France (which I visit and within whom I have quite a few friends for a "monolinguist"). Frankly, I've agreed with them recently. America certainly did decline when Bush took office and I immediately got on my roll to my international contacts for their take. Yes, when Bush was elected, America was doomed to decline. Bush just doesn't know enough about global politics. And it's always better to get the opinion from someone outside looking in. We tend to get a rosy picture inside the country.
The question above is worded correctly. The problem is that for us "uncultured outsiders" (thank you all for assuming my ignorance based on where I live, it's lent much credence to your insults based on ignorance) and even in the French media, this election looks an awful lot like one of ours. Sarkozy looks like a half-crazy neoconservative and Royal's critics mutter about incompetance, wishful thinking, and the like. That sounds an awful lot like the last few elections with Bush the Jr.
Like it or not, the problems this time around are difficult to answer. If the unrest of muslim immigrants are the problem, what is the solution? It requires a lot of finesse, a lot of respect, and a lot of reputation. How do you appeal to the muslim immigrants for patience without specifically targeting them and driving up the resentment? The economy is ALWAYS a muddy issue. How do you inspire the working class? How does your social system prop up the unfortunate while still trying not to make them permanently "unfortunate." And remember that "unfortunate" people also can vote.
Is France doomed to a decline? It's sure possible. Nobody is seriously suggesting that it is doomed to failure. My French friends (especially Helene out there in Lille, shout out) are more worried about what they'll do after college, what their business is going to do over summer, and, shall I say, personal issues than the ongoing election war. Seriously, decline? Maybe, but there's nothing on the plate that's going to destroy France in the next few years. And even if France does go into decline in some kind of United States style, obviously they won't stay there. The United States isn't likely to either. We've got an election coming up ourselves to try and dig out of the hole we've dug into.
Maybe France is already IN decline and the incoming President will bring them out. Declines are always subjective. France may come out of a decline it never knew it was in. Unlikely, though, since Paris was perfectly fine the last time I went there. A little edgy with the violence, but who wouldn't be?
In the end, it's something we have to wait and see. All this doom- and boom-speak is great before the election, but we'll see what's going on after it's all said and done and the dust settles. The decline is in a lot of places, and where France may or may not be declining differs from candidate to candidate. After all this campaigning, they've got a whole cycle to bring their country back from the brink of whatever oblivion they're campaigning against.
Then they can pound THAT rhetoric into your head over the next election cycle. Whether or not France is declining, you can always feel good that, no matter what, the next election cycle will be ALL about how candidate X got France out of it. Joy...
April 26, 2007 1:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
i think this is from the bible. one day a powerful king wanted to learn the one law that would always apply to everything. he called in his advisors and demanded the answer. after a time he called them in again and when they did not know the answer he killed them and went to another group. soon no one wanted to be the kings advisor, but he was the king and if he said you were picked, you were picked. again he posed the question and waited for an answer to the question, what is the one law that will apply all the time to eveything. this time the advisor said "AND THIS TOO SHALL PASS". he served his king for the rest of his life.
nothing stays the same, not the boundries of a tribe, city, state or country. not the people or family that runs it, nor the political system that controls it. not even the earth stays the same. everything changes because THIS TOO SHALL PASS.
April 26, 2007 12:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Sarkozy was certainly not acting like a 'moderate populist'in calling the slum youth "racailles"
(riff-raff). That population has since become very aware of its' voting power and their motto is that Sarkozy=Iznogood.
April 26, 2007 10:47 AM | Report Offensive Comments
France will be alright. They know the value of the social side and the grudingly will admit to the economic changes required. The sadness is in how they surrender to it.
But France isn't flesh and blood, only it peoples and people get by. The revolution is not a failure. It is a dream before its time.
April 25, 2007 11:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
France will be alright. They know the value of the social side and the grudingly will admit to the economic changes required. The sadness is in how they surrender to it.
But France isn't flesh and blood, only it peoples and people get by. The revolution is not a failure. It is a dream before its time.
April 25, 2007 11:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Sarkozy opposed and still opposes the American invasion of Iraq. Sarkozy is not a neoconservative.
He is a moderate populist. He favors uplifting the common person by reviving France as an economic powerhouse. His plan is right for France.
Various bigots are trying to paint him as a neoconservative because these bigots want him to lose in the run-off election. The bigots favor the open-door policy favored by Royal. The bigots want France to be overrun by Islamic bigots and Turks.
April 25, 2007 11:26 PM | Report Offensive Comments
NEOCON -
Now I've heard that Sarkozy has been accused of wanting to dismantle some of the social safety net in France and to have closer, friendlier, ties with the U.S. and U.K. But I have never heard that he was friends with our idiot "president" and the nutjobs that are American NeoConservatives. Do you have some sort of statement Sarkozy made or is there something to this? This sounds a bit like hyperboly to me, but I really would like to know.
April 25, 2007 7:54 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Sarkozy is a NEOCON, a Bushie in that respect. If he is elected the French will quickly find themselves in Lebanon, or Syria, or wherever the israelis want.
April 25, 2007 5:49 PM | Report Offensive Comments
It is precisely because of this same reason that 'France is on decline' that 'who the next French president would be' becomes all the more important an issue.
The world cannot ignore the profound impact of France on global economy, civil societies and world politics.
Today's geopolitical realities do not let anybody rejoice the weakening of any country as it spells grave dangers for people - its citizens in particular and the world at large.
April 25, 2007 3:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
It is precisely because of the same reason that France is on decline that who the next French president would be becomes all the more important an issue.
The world cannot ignore the importance of France on the global scene in terms of its profound impact economically, socially and politically.
The geopolitical realities of today are such that the weakening of any strong country spells more dangers for people - its citizens in particular and the world population at large.
April 25, 2007 3:26 PM | Report Offensive Comments
It is precisely because of the same reason that France is on decline that who the next French president would be becomes all the more important an issue.
The world cannot ignore the importance of France on the global scene in terms of its profound impact economically, socially and politically.
The geopolitical realities of today are such that the weakening of any strong country spells more dangers for people - its citizens in particular and the world population at large.
April 25, 2007 3:24 PM | Report Offensive Comments
I dont know what I think about a democracy where an elected leader is only truly supported by 18-25% of the population.
The United States has had a divider in politics for the last 6 1/2 years yet Jacques Chirac has been in the inner circle of leadership for over 20.
Is France doomed? The western world must recognize that there is little growth left int heir economies and that the future is in Asia (India, China, etc) and get over the romanticism that they are the most dominant countries in the world. Western Europe cant deal with the fact that they cannot have their cake and eat it too; they cant have their selfish policies against immigrants and keep their leisurely 25 hour work week including every benefit Mitterand could conceive. France, almost more than any, will decline as the developing world takes not only their manufacturing jobs but also their beloved intellectual jobs. What happened to the EU and its promise of grandeur? The French people will not even accept the Constitution, that while being one of the main architects and "beneficiaries".
The fact that France considers itself a major player in world politics yet refuses to defuse problems it created in its formal colonies in Africa shows its true weakness and future. It is and will continue to be a country of talk and little action. Say what you want about American foreign policy and the abominable war in Iraq, but at least past and future presidents are ready for some action if needed. How many french troops were in Bosnia, Rwanda, Ethiopia, etc?
France has declined and will continue to decline. As an American, I do not want nor would I want any part of the French system of democracy in my country.
April 25, 2007 1:43 PM | Report Offensive Comments
For those uglies who keep pointing out that there are many Muslims in France, and insinuate that's a terrible thing...perhaps you've missed the reality that France has the largest jewish population in Europe. And that most of the world considers that a minus...is NOT considered a bonus to say the least. Anti-semitism is rife in france. And in Europe, the west generally, and Asia, and.
Get wise.
April 25, 2007 1:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Is France doomed to decline? Do you mean by comparison to the United States during the last 6 1/2 years?
April 25, 2007 12:55 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Is France doomed to decline? Do you mean by comparison to the United States during the last 6 1/2 years?
April 25, 2007 12:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Letmegetthisstraight:
You can't say that Sarko is first generation hungarian immigrant. Only his father was. And his mother is not a Greek Jewess. His mother's father was a Greek Jew that happen to convert to catholicism by the way...
All in all, this is pretty common in France. Lots of people have one or two foreign born grand-parents (3 for Sarko)
April 25, 2007 12:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Yousuf Hashmi :
"...This is true that since last 20 years France role in core engineering production and international politics is declining..."
What? I'm an engineer. When was in France, I was demonstrating the newest instrumentation for installing and maintaining optical fiber, rf, and other sorts of communications networks. Now, I'm an American, with with more than 50 patents, and I worked for some of the U.S.'s premier companies and I've got to tell you I was flat out emabarrased. The French are far ahead of us with chip and wafer and communications and package marking and printing technologies. If they play it right, the French will leave behind in the dirt. Actually, this is true of the Scandinavian countries, too; especially Denmark and Sweden. They are inventive and original, produce top quality goods, have motivatative and very smart and hard working employees who aren't afraid of some corporate swine outsourcing their job or replacing them with an Indian indenured servant. The future, my friend, IS in France and Sweden and Denmark. The U.S., England, and Germany have permitted their governments and corporations to sell their future, bargain it away for short term gains by investors qand the wealthy. France watches those scumbags like the bugs they are, which explains why they are so loatheed and defamed by the media and right wing nuts over here. The last laugh will be France's burying us.
April 25, 2007 11:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
The choice of France's next President is of course of importance to the world. France has historically held a powerful position in geopolitics and continues to do so, albeit with a declining level of influence. But remember that France is one of the key members of the EU, an organisation that holds great influence worldwide. I cannot speak for one or other of the candidates in the second round, but can predict that France under Sarkozy or Royal will likely play a more important role than has been the case under Chirac.
April 25, 2007 8:17 AM | Report Offensive Comments
This is true that since last 20 years France role in core engineering production and international politics is declining.
This is itself not a major problem. France exploring its strength on rich agriculture products and its dominance or art culture and life style.
So far out siders living thousands miles away from the shores of France it does not matter who will be the next president of France.
France has a core strength of a highly educated work force as well as one of the best infra structure avilable. Therefore the country have all the potential to rise and become a leading member of EU.
April 25, 2007 2:08 AM | Report Offensive Comments
This question seems to have attracted a lot of attention and brought out of the numerous participants reactions which emanate from their various nationalities, religions and political affinities. In other word, instead of expressing opinions which come from serious thinking and objective observations, each one finds a forum to express his subjective reactions, which automatically create an antagonistic atmosphere, which is far from being constructive, because finally each one will remain adamant that he has the 'truth'.
One will never really have a valid view if he does not try to remain above all the 'truths' which are being thrown around. In my opinion, the only real truth is humanity which, unfortunately, has been overpowered by the new 'truth', money and power. Thus whilst a human is more important than anything else, we have put material elements above him. This is creating the world we are all on, and which cannot find a way to have us all live in liberty, equality and fraternity. We can still hope!
April 25, 2007 12:40 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Sarkozy is right in opposing Turkey's becoming a member of the European Union.
Check out the shocking story at the following link.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Apr05/0,4670,TurkeyInternetCensorship,00.html
Like the Chinese, the Turks block web sites. Also, the Turkish government tried to imprison the Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk for the "crime" of insulting Turkish society.
The Turks want us to respect how they suppress human rights. We respect them.
At the same time, we want the Turks to respect our right to preserve Western values. We have every right to prevent Western values (in Europe) from being contaminated by Turkish or Islamic values.
Sarkozy is right on the mark about trying to restrict immigration into France and about trying to prohibit Turkey from entering the European Union (EU). We should condemn Washington for trying to pressure France (and the rest of the EU) into admitting Turkey into the EU.
The last 6 years has demonstrated that Washington is incompetent on matters of foreign policy.
April 24, 2007 11:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments
frenchman said:
"Here's one reply from a Frenchman that does not address the United States: "France rated first in a 'quality of life' survey held by British International Living magazine for the last 2 years. Doomed? Doomed to free health care and education by a socially progressive electorate which refuses to give up certain rights maybe?"
Well, it's certainly a first baby step for at least one frenchman to address the question without direct reference to the United States (indirect references remain a question between frenchman and his creator).
I don't recall an international accord that made BIL surveys of its readers much evidence of anything. I do recall that a great many hi-profile EU worthies met a while ago and cobbled up the hilarious French-government propelled "Lisbon Accord" that proposed that Europe would become the world's best source of intellectual capital and technological innovation. Nobody is really talking about the Lisbon Accord these days, even (or especially) in France, except as a source of embarrassment. So by at least this one of its own measure of what matters, France seems to be in serious decline - and accepts that there is much more to come.
Whether "free" medical care or other French social policies are "progressive" - or merely constitutes the results of the usual rent seeking special interest legislation - would seem to require appeal to some kind of standard of "progressiveness," which is not provided. Certainly such policies do not seem conducive to general economic vitality. Certainly it is a stretch to suggest that the intentions of the great majority of French voters who caused such policies to be put in place were anything but grubby rent seeking.
By way of measuring likely "progressive" intentions: Do any significant number of the French actually give anything substantial to any charity worthy of the name?
April 24, 2007 11:13 PM | Report Offensive Comments
To LetMeGetThiStraight: Why bring up the point that Goerge Washington was a slave-owner. Who doesn't know that already and who cares. What does that have to do with France. This may come as a surprise to you, but in 1776, for someone born into the Virginian aristocracy, and despite the fact the slavery was awful, it was actually possible to have slaves working on your plantation and still be a noble individual in other aspects of your life.
About France: However, you are right about France saving our butts in the revolutionary war, just like we saved theirs later on. Part of the problem between the US and France is people in both countries are stridently patriotic about their county (at least many of us are) and see their country as the one qualified to lead other nations in world affairs. Remember that for a long time, French was the language of diplomacy. There are attitudes of French politicians that bug me and I wish French people didn't feel so patriotically competitive with us. However, after reading about Phillip Augusts' struggle with England, and reading about how bravely the French fought along-side us in the Korean war, I have to conclude that they are not panzies, and I can only dislike French people the way I dislike Giant's fans, in a competitive, good-natured way.
April 24, 2007 10:55 PM | Report Offensive Comments
The French governmental system has it's good points, and the government is to be commended for avoiding the siren song of US dollars into Iraq and Afghanistan, that has consumed NATO and the US and Canada...however, the French income tax system makes even the USA system look good. Until France fixes that, they will stagnate in the personal savings department. Royal has better ideas on what a democracy should be, yet she is a hard core socialist; Sarkozy is a bigot, and probably will not be able to change the tax system in a meaningful way...tough choices
April 24, 2007 9:09 PM | Report Offensive Comments
George Robertson : "A resurgent France? Quelle drole !! (That's "what a laugh" in froggie.)"
George, you'd do better with "Quelle blague!"... No need to try so hard, if you don't know the language. It only makes one wonder whether you know what you are talking about...
April 24, 2007 8:01 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Ah, I forget to add that I don't live in France but it is my home abroad... I don't like Sarkozy he's a NeoCon with a French passport. Furthermore he'll do or say anything to get a vote - sound familiar. When his model/actress wife committed adultery last year, he turned around and got himself a mistress. A trait of a vengeful persona. Also, it is widely reported that he pleaed with his wife before the campaign started to reconcile, his excuse was for the sake of their children - we think for his polotical career.
Royal isn't that fantastic in my opinion but my family that are nationals will vote for her - I don't know if I would even if I could - I am an American national.
For those who predict an easy victory for either of the two - guess agian.
Sarkozy is a first generation Hungarian immigrants son and his mother is a Greek Jewess. There has never been anyone elected president of the republic who is not at least 4 or 5 generations implanted. Also one final notation there are an estimated 500 000 Jews in France, lots of anti-sentism and there are about 8 million Muslims. The winner will need about 7 -10 million votes from the center to win - DO the math.
Vie la republique. Vie la France.
April 24, 2007 7:40 PM | Report Offensive Comments
France is a vibrant country and the people gracious. In 2000 fleeing the Bush and Co. coup, I an American national, veteran and CNN journlaist - predicting the deplorable decline of American values under a Bush administation, packed-up and moved to Paris. There are many things which I disagree with about the French but there are also many things which I disagree with about my mother country as well. Racism is rampart in the USA, period no discussion, I lived it. What upsets me sometimes is reading arrogant statements of the KOOL-AID drinkers and FREEDOM FRIES advocates. Whilst it is true the USA rescued France during WWI and WWII - I as a history buff remind my fellow countrymen that if not for the FRENCH during the battle of Yorktown, THERE WOULD BE NO USA. Also, General George Washingtion, president of our country and slaveowner would perhaps have been murdered which was the satus quo for captured colonist. I have noticed reading various post that HISTORY is not apparently a strong study of BUSH nor of his follwers. To reiterate, if not for the French blockade of the harbor in Yorktown, Lord Cornwallis' forces would have destoyed General Washington and the dreams of the USA. The General whose back was to the sea as Lord Cornwallis' forces advanced anticapting the Royal Navy Fleet - blocked by France - had no avenue of escape nor a plan B. In fact there is a famous painting all of you should study in the US National Archives of this historical event. Take a close examination of the ships mast in the harbor - Fleur de Lys - that would be FRENCH.
In esscence stop the anti-France rhetoric and the same admonishment goes to the ant-American sentiments offered-up by the French.
April 24, 2007 7:27 PM | Report Offensive Comments
THAT QUESTION had to have come from Ignatius. It is disgusting. There are many who believe the US's decline in the world and imorality in the war far surpasses any French problem.
The tenor of this whole subject is rife with anti muslim stuff...snide and what we've seen before on certain subjects....with vicioius attacks on Royal (not many accurate) But no one will mention that Sarky is a Jew. Is nobody proud? This is ugly. And all too typical.
April 24, 2007 7:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Do you know that a laid-off French worker gets 2 years of salary? Not even the Swedes do that, and at least they (the Swedes) make people re-train into another job in order to receive extended unemployment compensation. No wonder no French company wants to take on new staff. Every French government that has tried to take on the radical left to change these and other obsurdities has been forced to back down by a radical left wing. A resurgent France? Quelle drole !! (That's "what a laugh" in froggie.)
April 24, 2007 6:59 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Demography may not be destiny, but it is highly influential. Large pools of third world folk inside and outside of France have been led to believe that France (or the West, in general) is a major source of their misery, and they have been encouraged to arrive at this belief by "leaders" in their countries, various elites who clamp on their countries self-imposed poverty and self-imposed oppression and who are skilled in scapegoating. Added to that reality is the fact that now few French believe in anything, including the idea of "French culture," a belief that once cushioned France's geopolitical decline. (A warm feeling about being "European" just doesn't cut it.) Result: possible near-term catastrophe. Sarkozy may be able to reverse these realities, but he faces immediate and enormous challenges.
April 24, 2007 6:32 PM | Report Offensive Comments
MikeB,
Try:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_07.html
It takes some work, but you can figure it out. Specifically, look at table 7.
Where did I ever state I was pro gun control? Go back and read my post. I never said any such thing. All I did was put out statistics.
That the US has a high homicide rate is just a fact. People could argue over why the rate is so high and I can only assume the anti gun lobby blames it all on fire arms. Since I'm just a litle skeptical I have my doubts any one factor is to blame for this statistic. Having said this we still need to put it in perspective. The US rates 23rd in the world in per capita homicides. As a citizen you're 4 times more likely to be murdered in the US then in France. However, you're 15 times less likely to be murdered in the US then in Columbia.
PS: in a previous post Tom Wonacott accused me of being a member of the NRA. I guess I've now been accused of being on both sides:)
April 24, 2007 5:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
France is not doomed, of course, but it is going through a profound crisis. Whether this crisis will be going on and deepening for at least the next five years is a question to be decided by this election. What is at stake here is tremendously important for France, but also for Europe, the United States and the West as a whole. France is and will remain a key player in the European Union. France is also a key partner for the U.S., probably more solid than it seems, but certainly less than it should be. In a multipolar world an even stronger alliance of the West will be necessary not only between the governments but between the nations. There was always more than a bit of a rivalry between France and the U.S. and it's not a bad thing as long as there is no hatred. Unfortunately a part of the French Left, but an influential one, has turned anti-americanism into a rotten ideology. Only Nicolas Sarkozy can solve this problem. Not only by showing his admiration and good feelings towards America (a pretty courageous and risky stance by the way) but by re-energizing France,by giving the Frenchs more reasons to be proud of themselves. Royal is telling people that they are smart and that whathever they do is great. Sarkozy is telling them that they could do better. He is a leader, she is not. The Frenchs are arrogant and bitter because they feel being weaker. A stronger France would be a better partner in a necessary partnership.
April 24, 2007 5:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
France will not flourish because I am not there to be with my true love Trish Erskine. How are ya' babe? It has been a very long time, eh?
April 24, 2007 5:06 PM | Report Offensive Comments
The French have been finished for over a century. It is only a matter of time until their second-class status is acknowledged even by them.
April 24, 2007 4:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
This conversation is getting interesting. I am particularly interested in getting at what France is--the degree to which it is an economical event in contrast to an intellectual, artistic, cultural event. I wrote that what France has always seemed to me is a cultural event more than anything else and that perhaps this cultural event was neither made nor can be rescued by political methods (in short, it was a difficult to describe unconscious process). But of course politics must have entered the picture and that people are so aware of a cultural event as distinguished from a political cannot help but result in politics entering the picture to preserve trajectory of culture.
The point is France seems to be declining in the cultural sense, is spoken of now in the cultural sense as a place of people of good health, as a place where people value life over work, etc. (instead of cultural in the sense of a profound intellectual and artistic thrust). So is this new cultural understanding something as powerful and inevitable as the old culture of France or will France become increasingly political and more of an economic event (rather than cultural) to preserve at least something of France? With Sarkozy--and I hope he wins--we see an increased emphasis on the economical over the cultural (and with Royal we see no real championing of the cultural either) and the question should be asked if this is all France can do--if despite herself she must now become predominantly economical and political over the cultural.
And what does this mean? Does this not automatically mean decline? Is it not more exalted for a country that it can emphasize the cultural--its highest achievements--over mere economics? It seems France wants to remain a cultural force but events on the ground suggest cultural precedents are giving way to brute economics and politics...
And contrast this with the United States. The U.S. has always been about money money money. So does this mean the U.S. has never really forged itself as a cultural event and must do so or does it mean that the U.S. has always been in the odd state of ascending without really being cultural? Or is the U.S. just cultural in a different sense?
Just trying to contrast the cultural with the economic and seeking clues about how to determine decline.
April 24, 2007 4:23 PM | Report Offensive Comments
To Fleur de Lys
Tonight Segolene gave a long speech in Montpellier and Sarkosy gave also a long speech in Rouen.
If you heard them or if you can have a possibility to obtain the contents of these speeches, you will have the replies to all your questions. Good luck.
April 24, 2007 3:48 PM | Report Offensive Comments
The french thought that Iraq was a mistake- they agreed with the war in Afghanistan and are fighting there. Turns out they were right about Afghanistan.
Mush of Europe suffers from underemployment of the young. This leads to policies encouraging long schooling and less than forty hour work weeks- attemting to creat jobs on the one hand and hold young people out of the labor market on the other. Within a few years this will all start to change as the postwar generation begins retirement.
Most who babble on about the expensive social net in Europe know nothing about it- and can't even summarize govt. expenses for those countries with our own- program by program..
Too much un supported opinion and few if any facts lead to worthless discussion.
April 24, 2007 3:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
The french thought that Iraq was a mistake- they agreed with the war in Afghanistan and are fighting there. Turns out they were right about Afghanistan.
Mush of Europe suffers from underemployment of the young. This leads to policies encouraging long schooling and less than forty hour work weeks- attemting to creat jobs on the one hand and hold young people out of the labor market on the other. Within a few years this will all start to change as the postwar generation begins retirement.
Most who babble on about the expensive social net in Europe know nothing about it- and can't even summarize govt. expenses for those countries with our own- program by program..
Too much un supported opinion and few if any facts lead to worthless discussion.
April 24, 2007 3:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
The question is ridiculous on face value. The very same question was asked in the US's 2000 Presidential election, with the media and American public essentially saying (through polling during a time of peace and economic prosperity) that it didn't matter who lead the US.
Six years later, it's painfully difficult to say that the 2000 choice for leadership didn't matter. France is a nuclear power, a major diplomatic player with a seat on the Security Council, and a substantial part of the EU's economy. Social problems abound, as in any country, and difficult decisions will need to be made. But "doomed to decline?" Please. Of course it matters.
April 24, 2007 3:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
The Village Idiot wrote:
Yes France is doomed, for the following reasons:
No children. French women are not having kids. Therefore France will cease to exist fairly soon.
Too many Muslims. Who are having children. And will turn what was "France" into Algeria North.
Gone: Wine, cheese, art (it's not Islamic), the Eiffel Tower, Notre Dame (soon to be a mosque), the Louvre (not Islamic), Versailles, the Arc de Triomphe.
The only question is WHEN will Muslims overthrow the pathetic French governments and institute Sharia?
My response:
First of all, France women are some of the most fertile in Europe and have many more children than most other European countries.
Second, most muslims are not terrorists, what is publicized in the papers represents the acts of a violent few.
One of the strongest elements of French life is their secular government and social life. The Enlightenment really did influence people and they pulled their head out of the Middle Ages.
I suggest you do the same. Ignorance will get you George Bush and Freedom Fries. Have a good day, and God bless Bill Clinton, a relaxed man with his finger on the nuclear button.
April 24, 2007 2:52 PM | Report Offensive Comments