Emmanuel Macron, President of the French Republic

[Ned_Flanders]

You sure about that?

Yes

 

[Run n Spread]

Because the biggest problems in japanese history have been caused by its failure to learn and integrate with others. The tokogawa regime set japan back centuries, and it was only reversed by the meiji restoration.

Even then, the monoculture created an environment where japanese saw themselves as blessed by their god on earth and superior to all others, which has caused all the issues they have had with the rest of asia for the last hundred years

And now of course its leading to death by population collapse.

The obsession about being pure is ridiculous. People in japan for over three generations are still viewed as foreigners because they have a korean ancestor.

Monocultures foster a false sense of superiority, and encourage cultural and intellectual ignornance

Their immigration and Citizen requirements are spot on.

Rest I agree with. For lack of a better term they really need to loosen up.

They are like the Far North version of Australia (love it or leave). Where their people actually leave and for good.

 

[Run n Spread]

A week and a half thou. All we can do is wait.

While insular rabid nationalism goes nowhere, on the other end the whole Kom bay ya Globalisation one hand free market for 7 bill has gone far too far and left too many destitute. Let the French decide. We should do the same here.

From a historical and curiosity perspective it will be interesting to see which way they go.

 

[medusala]

Monocultures foster a false sense of superiority, and encourage cultural and intellectual ignornance

You can have different ethnicities and have monuculture. See England, took in Flemish, Hugenots etc but was monocultural. Noone could argue it wasnt a raging success and led the world in science.

Multiculturalism on the other hand has been a failure far more often than not. See the ME, Balkans, Africa, Belgium, NI, recent immigation in to Germany, France etc etc.

Switzerland is probably is the best case for it and it works there due to it being a federation.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

You can have different ethnicities and have monuculture. See England, took in Flemish, Hugenots etc but was monocultural. Noone could argue it wasnt a raging success and led the world in science.

Multiculturalism on the other hand has been a failure far more often than not. See the ME, Balkans, Africa, Belgium, NI, recent immigation in to Germany, France etc etc.

Switzerland is probably is the best case for it and it works there due to it being a federation.

England wasnt a monoculture, it had a dominant one, but not one alone

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

You can have different ethnicities and have monuculture. See England, took in Flemish, Hugenots etc but was monocultural. Noone could argue it wasnt a raging success and led the world in science.

Multiculturalism on the other hand has been a failure far more often than not. See the ME, Balkans, Africa, Belgium, NI, recent immigation in to Germany, France etc etc.

Switzerland is probably is the best case for it and it works there due to it being a federation.

A lot of the areas you mentioned were forced multiculturalism though, right? Eg. Iraq becoming a nation despite the conflict between the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites.

 

[FireKrakouer]

The only poll in that article is about how people perceive the campaigns started, not who they would vote for so not sure how that translates to polls tightening

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...n-presidential-canddiate-latest-a7705146.html

It's happening!!

 

[quotemokc]

Anyone who doesn't vote for Le Pen is a misogynist and wants the patriarch to continue

 

[Messenger]

England wasnt a monoculture, it had a dominant one, but not one alone

I think you're missing the subtext to "monoculture".

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I think you're missing the subtext to "monoculture".

I was trying to pretend that wasn't what he meant

 

[Maggie5]

Time to pick a side for me, think I will go with Macron.
Quite like the idea of him being happily married to an older woman.
Easy on the eye as well. Go Macron!

 

[The Speaker]

Dupont-Aignan has officially endorsed Le Pen, which is the first time such a thing has happened.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Dupont-Aignan has officially endorsed Le Pen, which is the first time such a thing has happened.

Far right politician endorses far right politician. Knock me over with a feather.

 

[Maggie5]

Far right politician endorses far right politician. Knock me over with a feather.

Also wouldn't mind being PM.
But it is all about policies, right?

 

[FireKrakouer]

Far right politician endorses far right politician. Knock me over with a feather.

I see you (and those liking your post) are buying the MSM narrative that Le Pen is "far right". Do you also believe that Macron is "centrist"?

 

[Happy Mastenator]

I see you (and those liking your post) are buying the MSM narrative that Le Pen is "far right". Do you also believe that Macron is "centrist"?

She's not? She exposed some leftist economic policies but that seems like bullshit given she's offered the PM role to a right winger.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

FFS peoples, the "left" do not all agree on the same stuff, and neither do the "right"

just look at Reagans old coalition.

1) Evangelicals
socially conservative, but a mixed bag economically, and internationally a combo of dovish and isolationist (except when involving spreading the word of da lord)

2) Neo-cons
mixed socially, economic rationalists and big on free trade, and massively in favour of the USA using its military might to fight communism and other badness

3) blue collar conservatives
socially conservative, far left economically, mixed on internationalism

all three groups at the time were of "the right", yet all three had differing views of three key policy areas.

no s**t that not all right wingers are economic rationalists, they never have been

 

[FireKrakouer]

She's not? She exposed some leftist economic policies but that seems like bullshit given she's offered the PM role to a right winger.

FFS peoples, the "left" do not all agree on the same stuff, and neither do the "right"

just look at Reagans old coalition.

1) Evangelicals
socially conservative, but a mixed bag economically, and internationally a combo of dovish and isolationist (except when involving spreading the word of da lord)

2) Neo-cons
mixed socially, economic rationalists and big on free trade, and massively in favour of the USA using its military might to fight communism and other badness

3) blue collar conservatives
socially conservative, far left economically, mixed on internationalism

all three groups at the time were of "the right", yet all three had differing views of three key policy areas.

no s**t that not all right wingers are economic rationalists, they never have been

I just don't like the media strategy of saying "this candidate is centrist and appeals to everyone. This other candidate is far left/right, and only appeals to extreme fringe nutters".

Being anti-globalisation and anti-establishment are characteristics that have been labeled both far left and far right. I think we need some new labels.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I just don't like the media strategy of saying "this candidate is centrist and appeals to everyone. This other candidate is far left/right, and only appeals to extreme fringe nutters".

Being anti-globalisation and anti-establishment are characteristics that have been labeled both far left and far right. I think we need some new labels.

two things i'll say on that:

1) they reason they do it is most people dont give a * and dont want to learn about candidates. the simpler it is made, the more likely it will be listened to (and hopefully understood)

2) the generic label of left right and centralist tends to apply to either the predominant political leaning of the candidate, or the relevant leaning for the predominant issue of the day. For instance, if it was 1953 USA and I believed in everything to the right of the scale (law and order, social conservatism, strong us internationalist policy) - except i was an economic socialist, I would be labelled a socialist without blinking (and blacklisted accordingly).

like it or not, right now the issue of the day in most of these electorates is immigration and race/religion. you may want 80% income tax and 100% tariffs on undies, but if you want to ban all brown peoples and label muslims as the devil, the media will call you "right"

 

[Gough]

I'm a conservative, I believe in the constitutional right to freedom of religion that the French enjoy, and believe it should be preserved.

 

[The Speaker]

FFS peoples, the "left" do not all agree on the same stuff, and neither do the "right"

just look at Reagans old coalition.

1) Evangelicals
socially conservative, but a mixed bag economically, and internationally a combo of dovish and isolationist (except when involving spreading the word of da lord)

2) Neo-cons
mixed socially, economic rationalists and big on free trade, and massively in favour of the USA using its military might to fight communism and other badness

3) blue collar conservatives
socially conservative, far left economically, mixed on internationalism

all three groups at the time were of "the right", yet all three had differing views of three key policy areas.

no s**t that not all right wingers are economic rationalists, they never have been

Hey, maybe this means that they are pointless terms and shouldn't be used.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Hey, maybe this means that they are pointless terms and shouldn't be used.

They are not pointless, it's just they are being used too broadly.

It's a tool for allowing analysis and comparison of differing views and ideologies. Fact people oversimplify or go absolutist isn't the tools fault

 

[The Speaker]

They are not pointless, it's just they are being used too broadly.

It's a tool for allowing analysis and comparison of differing views and ideologies. Fact people oversimplify or go absolutist isn't the tools fault

But they don't do the job. The left-right model is a falsehood, because it places liberalism as a middle ground between conservatism and socialism, when it is actually as distant from them as they are from each other. Furthermore, it places only one axis of difference for political ideologies, when it is clear that more are present.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

But they don't do the job. The left-right model is a falsehood, because it places liberalism as a middle ground between conservatism and socialism, when it is actually as distant from them as they are from each other. Furthermore, it places only one axis of difference for political ideologies, when it is clear that more are present.

and welcome the simplification!

under no political model is "liberalism" a centralist position

socially liberal is on the left of the scale

economically liberal is on the right of the scale

if you're gunna ban words from use because people get it wrong, you'll be banning a lot of words

 

[The Speaker]

and welcome the simplification!

under no political model is "liberalism" a centralist position

socially liberal is on the left of the scale

economically liberal is on the right of the scale

if you're gunna ban words from use because people get it wrong, you'll be banning a lot of words

Please. What is Emmanuel Macron called? A 'centrist', as opposed to the 'far right' Le Pen. It is far better at this point to throw it away than attempt to rehabilitate it.

The economic/social two-axis scale doesn't work well enough either, because it creates four ideological groups when there are only three.