Shootings and explosions in Paris

[LaCroix]

Self-proclaimed left tits.

ah, sorry duque -- misread

[Capetan Mihali]

You didn't import them out of the goodness of your heart, you know...

I'm so fed up with the argument that the left imports immigrants to get more votes and that Labour is in cahoots with muslims.
There is no actual evidence of this happening, but a nice fantasy for the idiots voting rightwing parties in Mitteleuropa.

Self-proclaimed lefti(s)ts should remember Engels and Marx about the use of foreign labour for wage deflation. Reserve army and all that. A whole chapter about it on the Condition of the Working Class in England by Engels. Back then, the Irish.
The left used to be against mass immigration. Still remember Georges Marchais, French communist party secretary general, wanting an end to all immigration in the early '80s. Unlike socialists and lots of the right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LG2BA9SxClM

Now, with the champagne left, it's all different.

I don't know the last 40 years of French history nearly as well as I do American.  But my sense is that what you continually deride as the "champagne left" (Hollande, Royal et cie, I assume you mean) has been virtually indistinguishable in their essence from the "champagne right" (Sarkozy et son amis) since Mitterrand times at least, because both prioritize neoliberal economics over anything resembling the national interest.

The only difference has been in which strains of rhetoric they prefer -- most notable when crises emerge, like "racaille" versus "tolerance" -- and on issues that are culturally important but socioeconomically marginal (gay marriage, "law and order") and some that were sheer spectacle (the veil).

So putting this down to the "left" is dishonest, beyond the fact that being "right" in France is like being "liberal" in America, i.e. something for politicians to avoid and find other words for... I'm forgetting this great term, that I think came into use around 1900, which describes the way all French parties have drifted to calling themselves "socialist" or "liberal" whatever their policy line...

[Razgovory]

who cares what engels/marx thought?

Fuck if I know.

[Capetan Mihali]

I care.   But I'm a leftit.

[Capetan Mihali]

Never anticipated saying this, but: great post, Martim.  

[Jaron]

Europe is the new Byzantine Empire holding the Mohammedians away from the civilized West. In 2015 we witnessed their Manzikert. It's only a matter of time before the nation states of Europe fall and America is all that is left of their legacy.

[Admiral Yi]

I don't know the last 40 years of French history nearly as well as I do American.  But my sense is that what you continually deride as the "champagne left" (Hollande, Royal et cie, I assume you mean) has been virtually indistinguishable in their essence from the "champagne right" (Sarkozy et son amis) since Mitterrand times at least, because both prioritize neoliberal economics over anything resembling the national interest.

They both prioritize neoliberal economics because the alternatives are all shit.  You raise taxes too high and business goes elsewhere.  You hand out too much free money and people stop working.  You raise wages too high and competitors eat your lunch.  You run deficits too long and people stop lending you money.  You nationalize industry and capital flees.

[The Brain]

The National interest has a strong Socialist component.

[Duque de Bragança]

I don't know the last 40 years of French history nearly as well as I do American.  But my sense is that what you continually deride as the "champagne left" (Hollande, Royal et cie, I assume you mean) has been virtually indistinguishable in their essence from the "champagne right" (Sarkozy et son amis) since Mitterrand times at least, because both prioritize neoliberal economics over anything resembling the national interest.

The only difference has been in which strains of rhetoric they prefer -- most notable when crises emerge, like "racaille" versus "tolerance" -- and on issues that are culturally important but socioeconomically marginal (gay marriage, "law and order") and some that were sheer spectacle (the veil).

So putting this down to the "left" is dishonest, beyond the fact that being "right" in France is like being "liberal" in America, i.e. something for politicians to avoid and find other words for... I'm forgetting this great term, that I think came into use around 1900, which describes the way all French parties have drifted to calling themselves "socialist" or "liberal" whatever their policy line...

Saying the champagne left is the same as champagne right (Sarko et ses amis please were called Rolex right I believe) is the province of the Le Pen family, and a bit of a caricature. Immigration and assimilation are major issues, unlike homo marriage sorry, thanks in no small part to the '68ers and their self-hatred which precisely hinders assimilation. Something the old communist party did not do. After all, the PCF saved De Gaulle's regime, by following Moscow orders. You could say though the centre-left and centre-right agree on most things regarding Europe, however.

Sometimes the French right tried to reverse things, family regrouping for instance: Chirac's idea, Barre tried to reverse it but Chirac's party was not supporting the centre and right government at the time, since he was no longer prime minister. A law passed by the right to prevent illiterates from gaining French citizenship through birthright was also overturned by the left and so on. Add in race to the bottom for PC reasons, economic downturn and you get banlieues.

So the last 40 years have seen a decline can't argue with that. That's actually the thesis of the best-selling book by famous rightist Zemmour, Le suicide français. Interesting read, lots of info and context given, but sometimes Zemmour gets lyrical, on minor points though.
This the one who reminded the left that the Communist party used to be as anti-immigration as the Le Pen family.
As for "right something for politicians to avoid", IMO yes but the real taboo word is conservative (conservateur). The French right wing never uses it.

[Capetan Mihali]

What's that French word that describes the national tendency for parties to over-describe as left/liberal, though?  It's something like "gauchisme" but obviously not that; I think somebody kind of famous described politics in the Third Republic this way... it's bothering me.

[Grinning_Colossus]

GC's grand theory of the political economy of migration:

Migration to the West is similar to the process of urbanization but on a larger scale. Mechanization and cheap food imports (due to 1st World agricultural subsidies) have made traditional subsistence farming untenable, alienating populations from the land. They first went to the teeming cities of the 3rd World, but there are few opportunities there. When the civil wars in the Middle East created a group of people desperate to reach Europe, a new industry arose to facilitate their migration, which then provided the surplus population outside of the conflict zones with an opportunity to go along for the ride. It's basically a repeat of the enclosure movement that created the industrial proletariat in England in the 18th century. Except, this time, Germany, France, Sweden, etc. are London, Manchester, and Birmingham, and the jobs are in the low-wage service industry rather than manufacturing. 1st World elites are happy to import low-skilled workers, since they dive down wages, making lattes cheaper. Now that it's really gotten going, it isn't going to end.

From a utilitarian perspective, it's a net good, since the gain to the millions of migrants is greater than the loss to the working class in Europe. And you can't fault the migrants--if I were born in Jordan or something, I'd pretend to be a 17 year old Syrian orphan who lost his passport, too. The alternative of promoting equitable development throughout the world probably isn't politically attainable, either. But at the same time, I can't blame some Europeans for refusing to take their lumps, especially given the smugness of the elites, who like to pretend that the whole thing is a humanitarian project.

[Duque de Bragança]

What's that French word that describes the national tendency for parties to over-describe as left/liberal, though?  It's something like "gauchisme" but obviously not that; I think somebody kind of famous described politics in the Third Republic this way... it's bothering me.

Sinistrisme. The left is sinister.

[spoiler]In Latin.[/spoiler]

[grumbler]

Never anticipated saying this, but: great post, Martim.  

I never anticipated that you were that far gone.  Martim is describing the neofascist faux-left as the good guys, and you seem to be swallowing it.

Marx and Engels are like Adam Smith - revered by one side for embracing the erroneous economics of their time, and disdained by the other side, when the proper view of them is to put them on the shelf with Montesquieu and Freud and say "they did as much as they could given the limits of their knowledge, but let's not pretend that they are still part of the modern world."

[Razgovory]

I don't know the last 40 years of French history nearly as well as I do American.  But my sense is that what you continually deride as the "champagne left" (Hollande, Royal et cie, I assume you mean) has been virtually indistinguishable in their essence from the "champagne right" (Sarkozy et son amis) since Mitterrand times at least, because both prioritize neoliberal economics over anything resembling the national interest.

They both prioritize neoliberal economics because the alternatives are all shit.  You raise taxes too high and business goes elsewhere.  You hand out too much free money and people stop working.  You raise wages too high and competitors eat your lunch.  You run deficits too long and people stop lending you money.  You nationalize industry and capital flees.

And if you pay people instead of using slaves, you'll never make a profit.

[Valmy]

They both prioritize neoliberal economics because the alternatives are all shit.  You raise taxes too high and business goes elsewhere.  You hand out too much free money and people stop working.  You raise wages too high and competitors eat your lunch.  You run deficits too long and people stop lending you money.  You nationalize industry and capital flees.

Yep yep.

Everybody is appalled by neoliberalism until they get in power...