if le pen elected, will france really will do brexit ?
Absolutely not.
The term "Brexit" was coined for Britons.
We could have a "Brexit", but we are out already.
For France it would be Frexit. And it's not going to happen even if Le Pen were to win.
Le Pen just wants to put the f** Germans in their place, not to leave the deal with them for both dominating Europe.
Anyway, she's going nowhere with the actual electoral French system, all the others will vote against her.
What's really interesting about the French elections is the end of traditional parties. Nothing else.
French elections are not for being analyzed by alliens. Even if Trump would love to be a Le Pen, the poor idiot doesn't have the balls.
frexit
You read the media and all the scare stories, one would think LePen is a rising superstar. Controversy sells.
However, the reality is in 2012 she had 18% of the vote. Now, in 2017, she has 21%.
is she make frexit as agenda to raise her popularity to gain more voters.
or she do that because it is best for france?
Hilarious (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/french-election-russian-hackers-emmanuel-macron-target-japan-trend-micro-france-president-a7700721.html)! :)
France is in a mess and a very sad place. That the National front leader did so well says much although I think she will not win the Presidency.
France, as always, is leading the way with the fall of traditional parties.
Soon, there will be no more of this parties guilty of opressing populations for so long.
Be it on Europe or in all the rest of the western world.
A new revolution is arriving.
The Death and Life of Social Democracy (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/europe/2017-04-25/death-and-life-social-democracy)The Anglo-American press may still be obsessed with Le Pen, (https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/this-analysis-shows-how-the-british-press-is-fixated-on-mari?utm_term=.bs5gmxNzm#.qfR0W7xzW) who will face off against Macron in the second round, but Macron’s rise is the real story out of this turbulent election. He beat out Le Pen, who has led first round polls since they began in 2013. His party did not exist a year ago; like Trump, he was never elected into office before launching his movement, although he served in an unpopular administration. Macron was also bitterly criticized for his passionate defense of European ideals. And yet, the outsider has now swiftly secured the endorsement of the defeated Socialist candidate, Benoît Hamon, as well as that of François Fillon, leader of the rebranded Gaullists. The youngest French leadership since Bonaparte is now within reach, to the detriment of populists and tired establishment parties alike.
Ultimately, political parties come and go; so do ideologies. What is at stake in Europe’s busy 2017 electoral calendar is not merely the overhyped rise of populism (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2016-10-17/populism-march), but also the electoral relevance of social democratic values in the post-industrial age. Pasokización is a plausible outcome, and it is indeed afflicting establishment parties that have failed to answer (valid) questions posed by populists. Yet the most likely electoral result in France, and potentially in Italy within a year, suggests that it is not yet time to throw social udemocracy to the dustbin of history. Deserting the center seems like a worse strategy than energizing its base with reformist, uncorrupted, future-oriented leadership. There is a market for such leaders, if only the appropriate politician dares to make such a case.
The writer is confused. Macron is no Social Democrat and not centre-left, rather centre-centre or centre-left/centre-right/whatever. He's right that Macron, not LePen, is the story.
A new revolution is arriving.
Led by Macron, the new French darling of Berlin. :)
A new revolution is arriving.
Led by Macron, the new French darling of Berlin. :)
The French Socialist Party has finished, the Republicans the same, that's a revolution. That's the equivalent to the end of Democrat and Republican parties in the USA.
Macron, I don't know what he is, Berlin darling or whatever, but I know he doesn't even have a party.
Soon, we'll be able to understand and analyze what's going on, not right now.
Macron, I don't know what he is, Berlin darling or whatever, but I know he doesn't even have a party.
Correct, he doesn't even have a party and this is the main reason for being the darling. ;)
A toothless tiger at best or a toothless tomcat at worst.
Yeah he is a toothless person. He jumped from his normal political corner because he knew it was going nowhere. Interesting to see Belfrager going down the tubes on political nonsense. Hhhm but maybe in wider tolerance he comes from a messed up country that depends on handouts and cap touching to exist.
While Krake and Rjhowie enters into allucination, Obama gives his support to Macron (as if any French would care about an American's support) and Le Pen get's severely hurted at the top TV debate.
France is the most influencing and exemplar Nation in Europe, despite Germany being the most powerful finantial occupiers.
Next Sunday I hope German dictatorship to start falling with the arise of the France Nation.
Allons enfants de la patrie
le jour de gloire est arrivé...
France has turned into an American suburb...
I hope I'm wrong.
I think you are in danger dear Belfrager of living in cloud cuckoo land of your mumblings about traditional politics being removed and replaced by your attitude. More chance of me kissing the Pope's ring that that! :hat:
so, macron win as expected.
btw is the winning of centrism in france can affect political climate in the world ?
Unlike the US presidency the primary damage a French president would do would be to his own country. Like the US (and Russian) the French presidency is powerful and non-parliamentarian, a president has the leeway to do a lot of strange things on their own, and historically they have. More outside the EU than inside, where there are more checks and balances.
Neither candidate had party support in the parliament (National Front has 2/577 delegates in the National Assembly, Macron has none). That puts him in an interesting position. He might become ineffectual, like Sarkozy who came up with three new schemes every morning, pulling through with hardly any of them, and eventually alienating everyone inside or outside of France, or Hollande, who managed to do the same thing without coming up with any schemes. I think that may be the most likely outcome, but I have never really gotten into French politics.
It may also be that he is shrewder than we think, and that could have long-lasting consequences, particularly for the EU, and I am not sure we're going to like it. The EU has not been in such a strong position as now for about 20 years. The last time was in the middle 1990's when the dust from the collapse of the Iron Curtain had mostly settled. We got the Maastricht Treaty and the EU enlargement. The latter buried any hope of the French ruling classes to dominate the EU, the former reduced the rulers' possibilities to dominate France (offset by better possibilities inside and outside the EU). With Britain gone there might come some French-German power moves on level with Maastricht in their combined impact.
The French are bunch of emotional frenzy style people. An awful lot of Frenchies didn't even vote! The National Front got a third of the votes so the overall picture tells more. Whoever won makes little difference as it is the 4th Reich that runs Europe.
frenzy style people
Hey Frenzie, you are creating school.. with good wine and cheese. :)
The EU has not been in such a strong position as now for about 20 years
Care to ellucidate what is the "such a strong position" the EU has now?
Never, ever, the EU was at such low position.
The British traison doesn't make a stronger EU. Punish the traitors, I agree with that, but nobody should think that France can stop Germany. Never.
Is not possible to have a strong EU, while Germany is illegally deciding everything about Europe.
An invisible Reich, the fourth I suppose.
Europe is under occupation.
frenzy style people
Hey Frenzie, you are creating school.. with good wine and cheese. :)
L'état, c'est moi ! :p
Care to ellucidate what is the "such a strong position" the EU has now?
Never, ever, the EU was at such low position.
The British traison doesn't make a stronger EU. Punish the traitors, I agree with that, but nobody should think that France can stop Germany. Never.
Is not possible to have a strong EU, while Germany is illegally deciding everything about Europe.
An invisible Reich, the fourth I suppose.
Europe is under occupation.
We agree, it seems, that the countries have the power in the EU, and really the most powerful at that, which in particular means Germany.
If we go back to the original vision of what was to become the EU, that vision was decidedly Charlemagnean. The ideal was the Germanic war criminal Charles the Great. A recreation of a new Western European superstate without Britain, Portugal, Sweden or Poland. Britain has never wanted that, so when in they immediately set out to corrupt it, by arguing for Greek membership. (They are still at it, so the same politicians that campaigned that Britain should leave the EU because of the danger of a Turkish invasion through the EU are the ones arguing that Turkey should become an EU member.)
I think the corrupted British vision is far better, but not accidentally it also means that the EU is less powerful. Whatever power the EU has is what the constituting nations give it. Many of those nations, not the EU itself, have had a prolonged crisis of confidence. The EU is relatively popular, while nations that have traditionally been strongly for EU have lost a lot of that support, nations that have been critical of the EU have begun to like it a lot more. It's a harmonisation of attitude so to speak. The troll factories in the US, Russia, Iran... have not had the deleterious effect intended. On the contrary, Putin, Trump, Erdogan and Brexit have made the EU far more attractive.
European integration in fields that for decades have been blocked by member nations (particularly Britain), may come on the agenda. As I said, I don't think I like it, and I suspect many of you won't either. Like the British I prefer an EU not so dysfunctional as not to get things done, but not so functional as to get ideas. The pendulum seems to be swinging towards the latter.
The EU for all it's cobblers is still a financial headache.
Btw, what's negative about repairing shoes?
On the contrary, Putin, Trump, Erdogan and Brexit have made the EU far more attractive.
Without enemies there's no unity.
Like the British I prefer an EU not so dysfunctional as not to get things done, but not so functional as to get ideas. The pendulum seems to be swinging towards the latter
British are not interested at the EU and they probably never were. They thought they could stop Germans by beig inside, when they realized they can't do it, they just leave, always with their egotistic vision, rats leaving the ship as they did before at so many "alliances".
I think the EU, as originally defined as an "Europe of Nations" is the most advanced level humanity has ever got.
It's not an easy way but I believe to be wortwhile to defend it. It can't be extended to everybody, British were the first to show it.
I think that an EU that respects each Nation has to be slow at changing things. When people wants velocity they should chose occupation.
Even slow EU is way ahead from the entire rest of the world at everything that matters citizenś quality of life and respect for our rights.
Being geographically physically separated was an influence but I have to say the Euro has been struggling for some time now and still no sign of being stabilised. So things are not that concrete.
If we go back to the original vision of what was to become the EU, that vision was decidedly Charlemagnean. ... Britain has never wanted that, so when in they immediately set out to corrupt it, by arguing for Greek membership. (They are still at it, so the same politicians that campaigned that Britain should leave the EU because of the danger of a Turkish invasion through the EU are the ones arguing that Turkey should become an EU member.)
It wasn't only Britain that wanted Turkish (!!!) membership. German and French leaders were also in favour of it. Those three (Britain, Germany, France) used to constitute the EU3, the major force pulling the strings (or by pulling which anybody could pull the strings) and it will probably continue like this even when Britain is formally outside.
Greece into eurozone - criminal and stupid. Turkey as a suggested member of EU - insane and evil. All important EU members were irrationally in favour of it. Luckily Turkey itself made this impossible, but I suspect that once the war in Syria is over, the negotiations will be started again.
I think the corrupted British vision is far better...
Better for whom? Better in what sense?
...but not accidentally it also means that the EU is less powerful. Whatever power the EU has is what the constituting nations give it.
Not so simple. EU is a world force. When it's weakened, a world force is weakened, and the interest in keeping it weak lies outside EU, not inside. Inside EU, Britain has always been intentionally undermining EU (showing that it never was a proper member), but the others have been doing it only out of ignorance and stupidity. It's not been so much EU members weakening EU as it's been US and Russia taking it apart whenever they feel like it, proving the weakness of EU.
Many of those nations, not the EU itself, have had a prolonged crisis of confidence. The EU is relatively popular...
Where I am, EU was never popular. The popular perception is ambivalent. EU is good for some things, and if it did them well, it would be popular. Unfortunately EU is barely functional, while being thoroughly bureaucratic, technocratic and anti-democratic. The only thing saving it from people's rage is that some things work somewhat, but for example borders have been reappearing lately so even this aspect has stopped functioning. The world in the immediate vicinity of EU has always been in turmoil and EU has been dismal at addressing this.
At the moment I cannot think of a single thing that works with EU. Its only purpose for the time being is to keep itself distinguished from enemies (enemies like Britain, US, Turkey, Russia...) but EU has always been bad at this. There is no hope.
On the contrary, Putin, Trump, Erdogan and Brexit have made the EU far more attractive.
Yeah, the way a kitchen knife is attractive when you find a bear scratching at your door. But everybody knows kitchen knife is not much help against a bear, so it's not really very attractive, and it never was attractive in the proper sense of the word.
EU at strong position ?
then why euro weaken sharply in this few days?
then why euro weaken sharply in this few days?
You can't take market fluctuations short-term to mean anything,
Sparta.
market fluctuations
Reminds me of a joke. :)
A Chinese man walked into the currency exchange in New York City with 2100 yuan and walked out with $300.
The following week, he walked in with another 2100 yuan, and was handed $276.
He asked the teller why he got less money that week than the previous week.
The teller said, "Fluctuations."
The Chinese man stormed out, and just before slamming the door, turned around and shouted, "Fluc you Amelicans, too!"
It wasn't only Britain that wanted Turkish (!!!) membership. German and French leaders were also in favour of it. Those three (Britain, Germany, France) used to constitute the EU3, the major force pulling the strings (or by pulling which anybody could pull the strings) and it will probably continue like this even when Britain is formally outside.
Greece into eurozone - criminal and stupid. Turkey as a suggested member of EU - insane and evil. All important EU members were irrationally in favour of it. Luckily Turkey itself made this impossible, but I suspect that once the war in Syria is over, the negotiations will be started again.
Greek membership was at least ahead of time and certainly disruptive to any vision of a deeply integrated union cum federation. The French government has always and consistently been deeply hostile to the idea of Turkey inside the EU, they have never been "in favour". What people say and their real intentions are not always the same thing. It took the Turks too a while to catch on that France would never (for a fairly prolonged value of "never") allow Turkey on the inside, but for the last five years or so it has been clear. Germany too is hostile, but they at least at times could entertain the notion. Turkey has now been "associate member" of this club for fifty years while they can see other countries (like Estonia) get in after waiting a few years in line.
Those of us that like to play the long game still like to see Turkey in the EU, but by the current situation it won't happen in most of ours life times. Turkey is also more on equal footing, due to rapid economic growth. In 1980 Greece and Turkey had about the same size economy though Turkey had five times the population. Today Turkey's economy is almost four times Greece's, with seven times the population (Russia had four times the population and five times the economy, now double the population and more than half again the economy).
Quote from: jax on 2017-05-09, 10:41:42 (https://dndsanctuary.eu/index.php?msg=72293)I think the corrupted British vision is far better...
Better for whom? Better in what sense?
The EU as the All-European marketplace of money, people and ideas versus the original concept I caricatured as a second Carolingian Empire.
An EU with Portugal, Scotland, Sweden, Greece and Estonia in it is a better EU than one without.
Not so simple. EU is a world force. When it's weakened, a world force is weakened, and the interest in keeping it weak lies outside EU, not inside. Inside EU, Britain has always been intentionally undermining EU (showing that it never was a proper member), but the others have been doing it only out of ignorance and stupidity. It's not been so much EU members weakening EU as it's been US and Russia taking it apart whenever they feel like it, proving the weakness of EU.
Where I am, EU was never popular. The popular perception is ambivalent. EU is good for some things, and if it did them well, it would be popular. Unfortunately EU is barely functional, while being thoroughly bureaucratic, technocratic and anti-democratic. The only thing saving it from people's rage is that some things work somewhat, but for example borders have been reappearing lately so even this aspect has stopped functioning. The world in the immediate vicinity of EU has always been in turmoil and EU has been dismal at addressing this.
At the moment I cannot think of a single thing that works with EU. Its only purpose for the time being is to keep itself distinguished from enemies (enemies like Britain, US, Turkey, Russia...) but EU has always been bad at this. There is no hope.
Yeah, the way a kitchen knife is attractive when you find a bear scratching at your door. But everybody knows kitchen knife is not much help against a bear, so it's not really very attractive, and it never was attractive in the proper sense of the word.
Let's look at the actors, and the powers. The power behind the EU are the national governments, and not all of them. The real capitals of the EU are Berlin, London, Paris and Brussels, roughly in that order, with London to be removed. Other countries, like Italy, Netherlands, or Poland, have influence mind you, but there are no permanent blocks. Britain and France have all aspects of power, including the ability to project military power. Germany doesn't have that, but have all other aspects of power, most obviously economic power.
Those having power don't give it up easily, and that is the situation with the EU. Giving up domestic control of the economy in the interest of trade is easy, everybody wins. Most everybody in business at least. Giving up other forms of powers come harder. Over the decades gradually more power has flowed to the EU level, mostly as a consequence of one crisis or another, sometimes by a rare confluence of interest. The EU started as a tent, now it is a semi-permanent superstructure. But as long as the Estonians don't care much for the Greeks, and neither the Portuguese for the Germans, this process will proceed at trickle speed.
At the same time, the relative power of the EU member nations in the world is declining. Europe is no longer on top of the world, it's just another place. The EU, were it a nation, would be a world power. On the other hand, were it a nation it would probably be as miserable as the US, maybe worse. Thus my preference for a half-way house.
The EU doesn't have a democracy deficit, it has a democracy surplus. But powers, once given, are hard to take away, so we will have to live with that. Bureaucracy is always good. History has taught us that the one with the better bureaucracy wins in the end.
Nice try to move the discussion, but I think the Europe thread is even better for this.
The EU as the All-European marketplace of [...]
That's your problem, you don't understand that Europe is not, never was supposed to be and should never be a "marketplace".
Anyway this is about France. Solely.
Well jax interesting you lump Scotland in with those poor economic mess countries but there is no way Scotland would or will be so destined.You can take the Scot Nat nutjobs and do what you like with them though. :up:
For those who might be interested, here's an opinion piece worth reading (https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10310/emmanuel-macron-islamism)… (Well, I thought so. :) )
But this is about France (and Europe) and its future. Presumably, some of you are interested, as well.
Maybe not: People like ersi and Belfrager are tending their gardens or gazing at their navel lint…
i think europe is not europe union.
france not doing frexit, i guess its still in EU and still using euro currency
Europe is not, never was supposed to be and should never be a "marketplace".
Whether it was supposed or not, the whole world is a marketplace ever since our ancestors started to exchange goods and slaves.
There are indications that the Neandertals were trading amongst themselves. If that were the case Europe was a market place long before the first humans of our kind arrived. Those too had European trade posts, though it was hardly fullblown capitalism (even back then they had the four freedoms though, the free movement of goods, capital, services, and labour).
There are indications that the Neandertals were trading amongst themselves.
:) Evolution:
(https://image.ibb.co/kdWZFk/1.png)
There are indications that the Neandertals were trading amongst themselves. If that were the case Europe was a market place long before the first humans of our kind arrived.
Nonsense.
Trying to use ape-like creatures to justify "liberal" capitalism against what makes European ideals unique and ahead the rest of the world, dignity of the human being, a fair redistribution of wealth and a sustainable development.
Hhhm. Bet if you won millions you would be tempted to be hypocrtical?! :up:
A market place is not a place where there's a market or people simply trade. A marketplace, at it's current definition, meaning "liberal" capitalist definition and vision, it's a place were market rules above morals.
That's what globalization tries the entire world to be.
President Macron's party seems to have done quite well.
Best of luck to our oldest ally.
Oldest ally? Yeah when it suited.
The first ally of America was... Marroco.
I saw the treaty.
Link, link! ;)
The early allying of France to the ex-colonies? Hhhm the Frenchies deserved the mess of the revolution they got. :happy: :devil:
Link, link! ;)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moroccan–American_Treaty_of_Friendship
Morocco... what a long history of dictatorship that place was.
The need for an European army made it's first victim, chef d'état-major des armées, Général Pierre de Villiers, has resigned because he has no money from the idiotic politicians to stop an European army dominated by the Germans.
All the French military are at his side.
Thanks to Trump, Europe finally starts dealing with the important things for our survival...
Well we won't be in a European army so that's good. :up:
The need for an European army made it's first victim, chef d'état-major des armées, Général Pierre de Villiers, has resigned because he has no money from the idiotic politicians to stop an European army dominated by the Germans.
I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at considering France spends many billions more (https://www.iiss.org/-/media//images/publications/the%20military%20balance/milbal2016/mb%202016%20top%2015%20defence%20budgets%202015.jpg?la=en) than Germany.
Well we won't be in a European army so that's good. :up:
Getting out of NATO then? :P
And what could be more traditional daft French childishness than the nonsense where the man in charge of the military went into a huff because of budget cuts and even mouthed off in public. The president was right to want to get him kicked out.
What an emotional lot. They got binned i Napoleon's nonsense at Russia messed up in WW1 and the same in WW2.
France spends many billions more (https://www.iiss.org/-/media//images/publications/the%20military%20balance/milbal2016/mb%202016%20top%2015%20defence%20budgets%202015.jpg?la=en) than Germany.
Yes, Germany is not allowed to have an army and look how much they spend with what they don't have...
Wait, is it still 1955? :P
Yes, Germany is not allowed to have an army ...
Not allowed by whom?
BTW, what do you think the Bundeswehr is? A costume club?
Not allowed by whom?
By common sense and for the sake of the world.
Nothing changed and financial power is enough for German pretensions, you need no bullets.
From all European potencies only France gives guarantees of a moderate future European Army command.
From all European potencies only France gives guarantees of a moderate future European Army command.
Moderate you say? They sure had their fun by bombing a defenceless Libya...
-
Not related but speaking of the French reminds me of a joke: French rifles from WWII are the best to buy. Never fired, only dropped once.
They sure had their fun by bombing a defenceless Libya...
-
The more they bomb some defenceless place the more they protect Europe, it has always been like that. Do you think that Europe is what it is because of what?
Now we have Germans speaking about bombing others...
The more they bomb some defenceless place the more they protect Europe, it has always been like that.
Wonder if anyone on these forums could top such a dumb statement?
Now we have Germans speaking about bombing others...
Indeed.
While Germans are speaking about bombing others, a Portuguese tries to justify the bombings by throwing an utterly dumb comment.
Wonder if anyone on these forums could top such a dumb statement?
:no: Easy. You'll provoke our resident Trump apologist. :insane:
Wonder if anyone on these forums could top such a dumb statement?
No one is better than you for that. Assume your ADN and stop babbling about being the humanist dear Arian.
Emmanuel Macron has spent €26,000 on makeup in his first three months as French president (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/24/emmanuel-macron-has-spent-26000-makeup-first-three-months-french/)
Not bad - that's roughly $330 per day. :lol:
Some people really need that much. :yuck:
Bit of a misleading title. Having your personal staff make-up artist probably costs a lot more than the make-up itself. :P
Bit of a misleading title
Yes, he's not a president he's a sissy that needs a make up "artist" behind him.
All that money on make up?? What a damn pansy.
The problem is not a President with make up, the problem is men with make up.
Being a President or not.
Well must say Belfrager that the Germans tried control freakery b Imperial means in 1914 then by dictatorial means in 1939 now they have been more practically subtle by money mean. Dodgy damn lot.
Germans are the ruin of Europe, Does it needs any more evidence?
Germans are the ruin of Europe
But there is a light at the end of the tunnel and it's spelled: P-o-r-t-u-g-a-l. :lol:
The day that Portugal was ever in proper light and not a begging bowl place of the EU i will support the Pope! :o
That would be fun to watch: Howie humbled! But I know he hasn't the self-awareness to succumb to any "reality" he wasn't raised with… Ignorance and prejudice are his mien, and he kenna leave 'em els' he'd be lost! :)
Imagine a routine Yank accusing someone else of ignorance or prejudice! :P
Imagine France being so inconsequential that even Howie no longer comments? :)
But there is a light at the end of the tunnel and it's spelled: P-o-r-t-u-g-a-l. :lol:
It seems so, ordered by your wheelchair nazi. Obey, as it is your costume.
The airplanes messed up the colours of the flag on Bastille day.
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2in5RfXAHs[/video]
We all know who is to blame for the glitches during Bastille day.
Most probably Vladimir Putin had once again his fingers in the pie. :)
BTW, here is another one:
[video]https://youtu.be/xuRQFIYGmW8[/video]
No wonder they messed up in WW2, haha.
Hey, Tour de France is on. Why didn't anybody tell me? https://www.france.tv/sport/cyclisme/tour-de-france/tous-les-directs/
Hey, Tour de France is on. Why didn't anybody tell me?
I'll try and remember next year.
I wonder if it will reach the end this year as the commentators here said that if France go back into lockdown again that will bring it to an end. Hope not.
Hey, Tour de France is on. Why didn't anybody tell me? https://www.france.tv/sport/cyclisme/tour-de-france/tous-les-directs/
Sorry, I thought you knew, otherwise I would have told you.
A Norwegian, Alexander Kristoff (cycling for
UAE Team Emirates), won the first stage, Nice to Nice. That's not how I knew. BBC has dropped out of my "neverending TV news" media bucket and France24 and Deutsche Welle has taken over the spot. Now it is something like 50/40/10 European/Asian/other. "Other" in turn is a mix of African and American, with a very occasional Australian thrown in. I have found no permanent favourite for African, they are not quite there yet. American is a mix of usual suspects from US and Canada (sorry
@Barulheira , still nothing south of Rio Grande (Mexico, not Brazil)).
I dropped out of US "easy listening TV" very long ago, the US is simply not very good at it. The only time I watched CNN was when in some mid-range Chinese hotel with the choice between it and RT. Dropping BBC was more of a surprise. It wasn't Brexit, more a death by 1000 cuts. Less interesting, less relevant, less insightful, and more inconvenient. Maybe it
was Brexit after all. No tiff, just a lack of interest. "See you around some day!"
Sure, forever news is a dying media form (b. 1980 †2020?), and I may not be the most typical news consumer, but for an anglophile to have dropped out of the Anglophonie completely, Britain has been the master of media, may mean something. Mind you, the US is still the superpower of virtual reality. If some American is killed by some other American under weird circumstances, in some suburb of some city of one of those American states, the whole world knows. Some youth in a banlieue in France? Who cares. I know more about the latest US cause célèbre and their family relationship than I know of Timo Haataja, a 35 year old man who died a month ago under suspicious circumstances after an encounter with the police literally a kilometre from here. And I only know
his name because I looked him up.
Anyway I am watching France24 now, a still-recovering francophobe, even learnt a few more French words than
merde (somewhere a Corsican general must be laughing). So I knew about
Tour de France, not out of a newfound interest in performance-enhanced sports, but because of their angle. Not "Who will win?" but "Will they finish?". As it turns out
Tour de France happens in France. Another thing that is happening in France is Covid-19. It's not just a question of which sponsored team gets ahead, but also whether the virus will get ahead of them. Imminent death makes sports more engaging.
Tour de California perhaps, during the wildfire season?
Side-effect of watching France24 is that I get more real-time information on areas like the Sahel, the coup in Mali. And Lebanon, but there I have a pre-existing interest.
Sorry, I thought you knew, otherwise I would have told you.
At one point I heard it was cancelled and did not follow the topic anymore. I accidentally noticed it was on when looking at tennis news instead.
A Norwegian, Alexander Kristoff (cycling for UAE Team Emirates)...
With all that covid around, I think the main reason for having the event is that Emirate money is aching to be spent. Another funny team I notice there now is Israel Start-Up Nation.
Side-effect of watching France24 is that I get more real-time information on areas like the Sahel, the coup in Mali.
Oh yes, the Sahel. :devil:
The video below is not new but interconnected with what we witness today. A reminder in case it was already posted by me in the past.
Guerre de l’ombre au Sahara: https://vimeo.com/129178179
I like the French way of offloading their post-colonial problems on others. The US enthusiastically took on Vietnam. They still do, as now it is as an ally to counter China.
Likewise the EU is taking over the G5 Sahel as a European issue will have long term consequences.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/G5_Sahel_map.svg)
French critics have not taken kindly to Emily in Paris, a new Netflix production in which an ambitious twentysomething from Chicago moves to the City of Light mainly, it often seems, in order to meet the gamut of Gallic stereotypes.
...
“It reduces the capital’s inhabitants to vile snobs sporting Birkin handbags who light up a cigarette the minute they’re out of the gym,” complained the women’s webzine MadmoiZelle. “Three episodes might have been amusing. Unfortunately, there are 10!”
“...the French are all mean and all lazy and never arrive at the office before late morning; and that they are incorrigible flirts with no concept of being faithful”.
...
Sens Critique’s reviewer said viewers “will really have to be science fiction fans to enjoy this series, because it seems Parisians can be polite, always speak perfect English, make love for hours on end and only have to go to work if they feel like it”.
Don't watch Netflix. It's not French.
Then again the French-Senegalese Mignonnes triggered days of bespoke outrage in the US. That's what happens when you get so big as to draw attention to yourself.
Netflix now worth more than ExxonMobil (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/apr/16/netflix-now-worth-more-than-exxonmobil-as-value-reaches-187bn)
I think President Macron is doing a wonderful job standing firm against the Islamic fundamentalists.
Top, he is doing a brilliant job against that corner.
We don't have any active French left on this forum, but I think this is a reasonable assessment of French policy ambitions.
https://youtu.be/v6g6LICWlWg
Complex theme.
Half of France's policy is correct, the other half is wrong. I suppose that these days the only ones with enough weight to make the balance to go one way or another will be Germany but it's a mistake to always follow what the money says.
Which half of France's policy is wrong? The half that is eagerly promoting tighter fossil fuel dependency on Russia (https://www.reuters.com/article/europe-gas-letter-idUSL5N2N52Q0)? That Macron laid a wreath at Napoleon's grave (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/05/world/europe/france-napoleon-macron.html)? That French soldiers warn of civil war (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9561561/Macron-sent-chilling-warning-soldiers-earlier-letter-calling-military-action.html) if there are more concessions to Islamism?
Not sure how many European countries do it, but it's news to me that France would begin collecting €30 from tourists (https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/visiting-friends-france-now-comes-20630559) as a fee for checking their documents. Checking the documents is not some service that officials render. I'd really prefer to have no such service. It's like paying to the police for the service of arresting me - it would only make them arrest me more! I hope this piece of news is based on some serious misunderstanding, because the Brits and the French never want to understand each other.
Anyway, according to my calculations, more than half is wrong.
Which half of France's policy is wrong?
The approach to Russia.
And a few more things.
Not sure how many European countries do it, but it's news to me that France would begin collecting €30 from tourists (https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/visiting-friends-france-now-comes-20630559) as a fee for checking their documents.
I'm not sure if this is news. I don't know the exact specifics, but for reasons I don't quite understand (spite?) the EU decided to mimic the US. That means non-citizens are required to pay $14 for a "visa waiver" that looks and smells an awful lot like a visa.
US:
https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta
EU:
https://www.etiasvisa.com/
https://www.etiasvisa.com/etias-news/etias-cost
They don't seem to wish to say how much it'll cost exactly, but €30 seems like a plausible if annoyingly high amount.
With that out of the way, treating the UK as if they were the US or Brazil is pretty much the entire point of Brexit, n'est-ce pas? :lol:
Edit: alright, I see I commented a bit too quickly. France is certainly going above and beyond there, aren't they. A registered invitation at the town hall? :insane:
I'm not sure if this is news. I don't know the exact specifics, but for reasons I don't quite understand (spite?) the EU decided to mimic the US. That means non-citizens are required to pay $14 for a "visa waiver" that looks and smells an awful lot like a visa.
EU and USA fought a few diplomatic battles over this. Post-9/11 USA unilaterally nonsensified the concept of visa freedom and imposed de facto visas on Europeans while still claiming it's visa free travel as usual. EU wanted to keep the standard concept of visa freedom. USA won. Obama kept what W had started, including tapping Merkel's (well, everybody's) phone and going even further, e.g. if the borderguards want to peek into your smartphone but it doesn't turn on, they will deny entry to you. Naturally there was no improvement under Trump. Now EU has begun symmetrifying these measures, making travel suck more for everybody.
The Year of the Covid has also helped quite a bit on this. Now there will be no escape from proof of vaccination even when visiting next-door countries.
Edit: alright, I see I commented a bit too quickly. France is certainly going above and beyond there, aren't they. A registered invitation at the town hall? :insane:
This is why I believe there has to be a misunderstanding. If the tourist is supposed to do it, it is way too similar to regulations on tourists in Russia, and that's too insane to be true. More likely the accommodation provider has to do it, and then it's a tax or administrative fee on French businesses, not on tourists.
I initially thought so too, but this seems to be more like a fee for being from unfavoured non-EU countries and having the audacity not to be living in a hotel. This list that does not include the UK (post Brexit) or US.
Brexit France: Do Britons need attestation d’accueil to visit family? (https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/Brexit-France-Do-Britons-need-attestation-d-accueil-to-visit-family)However, The Connexion looked into this issue in its Brexit and beyond guide (https://www.connexionfrance.com/Help-Guides/Brexit-and-Beyond-for-Britons-in-France) and found that in a survey of readers, those who were asked for this form only came from a country that requires a Schengen short-stay visa to visit France. This is not the case of the UK.
Countries that require such a Schengen short-stay visa include India, Russia, Turkey and South Africa. Countries that do not include the US, Australia, Israel and New Zealand.
On the other side of the channel some British border guards seem to be all-in (or -out as the case might be),
EU citizens arriving in UK being locked up and expelled (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/13/eu-citizens-arriving-in-uk-being-locked-up-and-expelled)
Reminds me of my first-ever foreign trip when I was still a USSR-ian going to Finland to meet my penpal. They say USSR was a bureaucratic country but the real bureaucracy broke loose when USSR ended.
In other news, Estonia's currently brightest diplomat, ambassador to France, OECD and UNESCO, was recalled and will be prosecuted for something that resembles espionage https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/93493587/eesti-suursaadik-prantsusmaal-clyde-kull-kutsuti-erakorraliselt-tagasi-alustati-kriminaalmenetlus
Hey, Tour de France is on. Why didn't anybody tell me?
I'll try and remember next year.
It starts tomorrow
@ersi :P
Thanks. I don't quite remember but last time I was probably able to view it here https://www.france.tv/sport/cyclisme/tour-de-france/tous-les-directs/
Edit: Ah yes, I posted the same link last time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLYLQmE6Uho
My bet is that Macron will win because all the other candidates are either weak or total junk. Besides Anne Hidalgo, everybody is junk.
Macron himself continues to be very harmful with regard to relations with Russia/Ukraine. He has spoken with Putin 16 times within this year (according to this article (https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1592450/emmanuel-macron-mateusz-morawiecki-vladimir-putin-ont) - Orban maybe wishes he could talk to Putin so often, or maybe not so he doesn't...) which is quite a lot of negotiating with a criminal with no visible result - or perhaps there is a result we are not being told about.
The current situation in Ukraine is precisely analogous to Sudetenland: Crimea and Donbass were awarded to Putin eight years ago, yet he is still not satisfied and continues to grab more land. Macron (along with certain other West European leaders) is instrumental in trying to solve the matter by compromising with Putin, again.
Macron is so eager about this that he even neglected his re-election campaign and the gap between him and Le Pen is narrow now. That's priorities, dude. Or more properly - that's a sure puppet, or at least a useful idiot. Anyway, everybody is junk so he is still going to win, I suppose.
A Hit French Novel Tries to Explain Putin. Too Well, Some Critics Say.Published shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine last February, the novel ["Le Mage du Kremlin"] has become a popular guide for understanding Mr. Putin’s motives. It has also turned its Swiss-Italian author, Giuliano da Empoli, into a coveted “Kremlinologist,” invited to lunch with the French prime minister and to France’s top morning news show to analyze the war’s developments.
[...]
At worst, critics say, it signals lenient views of Mr. Putin that are enduring in France and may shape the country’s stance on the war, as reflected in President Emmanuel Macron’s calls not to humiliate Russia.
“The book conveys the clichés of Russian propaganda with a few small nuances,” said Cécile Vaissié, a political scientist specializing in Russia at Rennes 2 University. “When I see its success, that worries me.”
[...]
Françoise Thom, a professor of Russian history at the Sorbonne, said these descriptions “completely conceal the sordid dimension of the Putin reality” and are “very close to the Russian propaganda image.”
Ms. Vaissié, the political scientist, put it more bluntly. “It’s a bit like Russia Today for Saint-Germain-des-Prés,” she said, referring to the Kremlin-funded television channel and the Paris redoubt of the French literary elite.
[...]
The arguments over the book are occurring just when divisions persist in Europe over how to deal with Mr. Putin. While Eastern European countries like Poland say he must be defeated outright, Western European nations like France have wavered between unequivocal financial and military support of Ukraine and reaching out to Mr. Putin.
“This book has become almost a textbook of history and politics for French leaders,” said Alexandre Melnik, a former Russian diplomat who opposes Mr. Putin. He pointed to Mr. Macron’s remarks that appeared sympathetic to Russia’s grievances.
Three presidential advisers declined to say, or said they did not know, whether Mr. Macron had read the novel.
Mr. Védrine, the former foreign minister, who has sometimes advised Mr. Macron on Russia, acknowledged that if the French president read the book, it would not lead him to adopt an aggressive stance toward Russia. He added that he saw a medium-term benefit to the book’s popularity: making the case for reaching out to Mr. Putin, “when it will be acceptable.”
Scholz and Macron are hard at work ensuring Putin's victory, following the scenario prescribed to them. Orban figured the game out early on.
Russian fake media campaign swipes across Europe. France's ministry of foreign affairs website got faked.
Le faux site du ministère des affaires étrangères français créé par « Doppelganger » et aujourd’hui hors ligne.
Cette page, très bien imitée, est en réalité la partie émergée d’une vaste opération d’influence russe, qui dure depuis plus d’un an. Les agents qui ont créé et diffusé cette fausse page de la diplomatie française sont aussi à l’origine de très nombreuses imitations d’articles de médias, reprenant parfaitement les mises en page du Monde, du Parisien et de 20 Minutes, ainsi que de la plupart des grands médias allemands. Des faux similaires ont aussi été diffusés en Italie, au Royaume-Uni et en Ukraine.
Also, Swiss websites attacked by Russian hackers.
Le groupe de pirates informatiques NoName n’a pas mis fin à ses attaques contre des sites Internet suisses. Mardi matin, ils ont annoncé avoir pris pour cible l’armée suisse. «Le portail des forces armées a été planté», ont-ils écrit sur Telegram. Peu avant 11h, le site Internet de l’armée était en effet indisponible mais l’était de nouveau sur le coup de 13h. «Alors que les autorités suisses continuent de fournir des armes aux nazis ukrainiens, nous continuons de punir les portails russophobes», ajoutent-ils.
Ce ne sont pas que les sites officiels qui sont ciblés.
Slowly, and perhaps not conclusively, Western countries get a taste of what it is like to be a neighbour of Russia.
Nicolas «Nous avons besoin des Russes et ils ont besoin de nous» (https://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/nicolas-sarkozy-nous-avons-besoin-des-russes-et-ils-ont-besoin-de-nous-20230816) Sarkozy is in yet another corruption scandal (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/25/world/europe/sarkozy-trial-france-libya-corruption.html). This time it is for having funded his election campaign with Qaddafi's money.
By the way, Estonia's PM Kaja Kallas is also in yet another scandal, this time something that could actually topple her, i.e. the fall of the government would lead to a different PM, not like last time. She has funded her husband's business, and his business includes transporting metal boxes to Russia. As everybody knows, among others it is military people who like to package everything in metal boxes. So there may be potential sanctions breach we are talking about.
In a decent democracy, we would not have to wait for a guilty verdict, but clean the air. When journalists confronted her, she gave very inappropriate answers, saying that she knows nothing, does not have to know anything, and that journalists are nasty for asking questions, all in one breath.
In her career as PM, she keeps stumbling into scandals wrt internal policies, while her international image as a strong pro-Ukraine driver in the EU is very different. As a minimum, she would have to clean up her act with domestic journalists. Her latest action is to declare she will not step down.
Estonia’s pro-Ukrainian PM faces pressure to quit over husband’s indirect Russian business links (https://apnews.com/article/estonia-kaja-kallas-husband-russia-sanctions-ukraine-957f88b5504dc4c344d0c660b081f7a1)