French Elections : Will Le Pen make it to the second round?

[DaShi]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Dal, I'm sorry that you see it this way.
It's not like that at all, believe me.

The two things: 1) Holocaust 2) Present Israeli policies in the occupied territories are not linked but it interests some people to link them so to get sympathy for Israel.

Jewish people and what they have been through are one thing.
Israel's policies in the Middle east are another.

BTW, from all people you chose me to tell me I'm not open to other opinions/points of view... Well, all I can say is, you're wrong


Natan,
Violence against Greek Jews is considered like violence against Greek Orthodox (or Greek whatever) or foreign citizen whatever. It is true, it simply does not happen (based on religion/race - there might be violence for other reasons though: a car - accident argument for example )

But there is police discrimination against immigrants (mainly Albanians) and to a lesser degree against Gypsies. IMO this is the first subject to be addressed in Greece now (from a human rights point of view).



About Norway: I don't know what things unfortunately. I heard a broadcasting about this in TV5 (International French - speaking chanel). The jewish pupils of these norwegian schools were harrassed by their co-pupils (specifically for being jewish) and they had to change schools. That's what it said.
It was a broadcasting about anti-semitism in Europe.

32

[Imran Siddiqui]

Which of thier neighbors do you think is up to the job?

As fg stated, Egypt could be a handful for Israel by itself. Throw in other bordering nations (and some not bordering) and Israel loses.

[nationalist]

This thread is very interesting. It fun watching leftists squirm .

Anyway, the rise of thr right isn't surprising. To incredibly simplyfy the matter, globalization + Immigration= growth of the right. Globalization moves jobs away from industrialized nations to underdeveloped countries. Industrial workers in the advanced countries lose jobs and gain re-employment in lower wage, non-union service jobs. Causes frustration and anger amongst the former industrial workers. Those workers need someone to take their aggression out on. Meanwhile, people from underdevloped countries flee to developed countries in search of a better standard of living and more money. They will work the dwindling number of menial jobs in the developed countries for lower wages than the native workers. This lowers workers wages in general. The frustration caused by a relatively lowered economic position leads natives to take out frustration on immigrants. Also, the immigrants, concerned primarily with economic issues, come into the country will little desire to assimilate. They keep their own language and customs. This clashes with the conservative lower middle class, especially rural citizens, who are anxious to protect their culture. Nationalist passions flares up in rural areas, leading to a rise in the right and a backlash against immigrants and the left leaning politicians who are seen as facilitating the immigrants arrival and promoting policies that generally try to destroy the country's traditional way of life. The lower middle class and displaced industrial workers begin to vote more and more conservatively. I can see this pattern happening in the U.S. Many feel that "progressive" movements have gotten out of control, and there seems to be a growing rift between Hollywood and middle America.

I am a poor rural American, son of a steelworker who has been laid off for the past 6 months. ( even though he has 22 years seniority at the factory) I, along with many others, watch in dismay as American basic industries leave the country. This dismay turns into votes for the right wing. The votes will grow more and more. I, for one, don't mind it at all.

BTW, I am amused when reading Europeans bash "Dubya" for being so damn conservative. For the most part he's fairly moderate, more of an economic conservative than a social conservative. By the way, why are European countries so much more liberal than the U.S.? Also, why are Europeans so pro-Palestinian? Is it just to spite the U.S., is it due to some old-fashioned European anti-semitism, or something else that is more subtle tha those choices? It seems to me that any state the P.L.O. would form would be an oppressive fundamentalist staet, something that would go against "European athiestic-socialistic, peace loving, green party" beliefs. Israel is a modern free market democratic country that is defending itself from attacks by bloodthirsty roublemakers that may or may not be supported by Palestinian leadership. Why support people who encourage 15 year old girls to blow themselves up in supermarkets to kill innocent civillians? Sounds like racism and genocide on the part of the Palestinains. Do Europeans support those kinds of policies? Apparently so. In any case I, for one, will never forget the images from September 11th of Palestinians celebrating in the streets while Americans died. Many Americans will never forget this. Sharon has my support, and the support of very many Americans.

[Adalbertus]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui:
Um... no... if Israel gets beaten, they they have to suffer a humilating peace accord, just like the Arabs had to.

No. Humilation is one of the biggest obstacles to peace. Hitler got a good deal of his strength from the humilating peace treaty of Versailles after WWI (Not that the peace treaty Germany would have dictated were less humilating to the French). The mildest conditions after many negotiations and one bancrupcy of currency in 1923 were paying reparations until 1980! I think that's (apart of Hitlers gigantomania) the reason for WWII.

Arresting a president is humilating for a people, and sending porns over pal TV is humilating muslims. Suicide bombers are humilating for Israel. As long as humilation on both sides goes on, the "normal" population will be driven extremist. And so long there will be no peace.

Again to France and Germany, there was only peace when (because of the cold war) humilation had to be stopped, and the presidents started to be friends (Adenauer-De Gaulle, Giscard d'Estaign-Schmidt, Kohl-Mitterrand). This is the only way to peace.

Paiktis:
(in a purely platonic way )

Just to give a change to another ME hijacked thread. The other off-topic big theme:
You know that Plato promoted homosexual relations (often with minors)

nationalist:
BTW, I am amused when reading Europeans bash "Dubya" for being so damn conservative.

As already pointed out in this thread, the views are a bit different in Europe and America. "Left" in Europe is socialist. In European standards I would see the economic politics of W as liberal (national), and protectionist (foreign affairs). Seen from the bad point: He is driven by industry. From his social politics he is more comparable to some conservative/right wing movements. In German terms: Economy: FDP (or populist Schröder ... ) and Social: CSU (the most right-wing/conservative I think is acceptable in a democratic state).

[Imran Siddiqui]

No. Humilation is one of the biggest obstacles to peace.

You've already had one side be humilated and the other side thinks it is invincible. If both sides are humilated then the invincibility disappears.

[Drake Tungsten]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

No. Humilation is one of the biggest obstacles to peace.

You've already had one side be humilated and the other side thinks it is invincible. If both sides are humilated then the invincibility disappears.

If Israel really believes that it is invincible, then why is it so concerned with security? Why elect a hard liner like Sharon to protect you from terrorism if you really believe that you are unbeatable? Israel may have kicked the crap out of the Arabs before, but they understand just how precarious a situation they are in, IMO. The start of the Yom Kippur War woke the Israelis up to the increasing quality of Arab militaries. Only a fool would consider himself invincible when surrounded by 100 million people who want to destroy him. Say what you want about the Israelis, but they are not foolish.

[aaglo]

It's quite amazing (actually scary) that Le Pen made it to the second round...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Say what you want about the Israelis, but they are not foolish.

Disagree... this entire action was totally foolish and will just create more resentment.

And I do believe that Israeli officials believe them to be invincible. They don't think they can be beaten.

[Drake Tungsten]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
And I do believe that Israeli officials believe them to be invincible. They don't think they can be beaten.

This is where we disagree. I've never gotten the impression that the Israelis consider themselves to be invincible. They are extremely confident in their ability, as they should be, but this confidence is tempered by the knowledge that the entire Arab world wants to destroy them. If anything, Israel is paranoid about the threat of Arab aggression. Paranoia isn't often associated with those who consider themselves invincible.

[Eli]

Imran :

First, Israel cannot lose a real war(not guerrilla ala Lebanon) without losing everything.

I'm sure you're aware to the Arab education and media. How many millions will be slaughtered when the Arab soldiers who grew on this hatred will conquer the Israeli cities?

Or do you expect them to fight from room to room to avoid civilian casualties?

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by aaglo
It's quite amazing (actually scary) that Le Pen made it to the second round...

nearly 27% of non-voters ! And our actual prime-minister decided to stop his political life.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I've never gotten the impression that the Israelis consider themselves to be invincible.

*points at Eli*

Paranoia isn't often associated with those who consider themselves invincible.

Most countries that thought themselves invincible were the most paranoid, so that their invincibility wouldn't be undermined.

Look at Rome, USSR, and the USA, some of the most paranoid states in history.

[Akka]

Originally posted by nationalist
Also, why are Europeans so pro-Palestinian? Is it just to spite the U.S., is it due to some old-fashioned European anti-semitism, or something else that is more subtle tha those choices?

If that's not a caricature of american behavior, don't know what's it...
You know, it happens that SOME people can think of their own without comparing only to USA.
Europeans are pro-Palestinians because Israël is still colonizing palestinians area, and because much of the terrorism these days is directly caused by the inhuman way Israël treats the Palestinian.
Since the Oslo treaty, there were only right-wing governments in Israël, and they all made nearly all what they could to sink the peace. That's why Europe is not feeling sympathy for Israël.

Of course, it's much easier to say "you antisemitic nazi" than to hold a sec and admit how fucked off were the politics of Israël.

In any case I, for one, will never forget the images from September 11th of Palestinians celebrating in the streets while Americans died. Many Americans will never forget this. Sharon has my support, and the support of very many Americans.

Why Palestinians were happy to hear about the Two Towers (and it's doubtful that these images were truly from september, as some people said they were from a 1991 news) is perfectly explained by the sentence in bold in your quote.

[Kropotkin]

I leave the thread to get some sleep and it degenerates into the same old Israeli/Palestine debate spiced up with the usual people with fuzzy opinions and generalizations about some strange place called "Europe"... Oh well at least Nationalist's first part makes sense even if his sig makes me wanna yell at him (and he could work a bit on his analysis, at least the parts about the immigrants).

This is quite a serious issue. One of the largest countries in the EU, albeit a undeveloped one, can possibliy elect a totally dangerous man (instead of Chirac who's appaling in many ways too). Since Spinky seems to like him I would think most here would understand that.

[GeneralTacticus]

Paranoia isn't often associated with those who consider themselves invincible.

Most countries that thought themselves invincible were the most paranoid, so that their invincibility wouldn't be undermined.

Look at Rome, USSR, and the USA, some of the most paranoid states in history

I doubt they thought they were really invincible, they just wanted to think they were - or thought they should be. When you think you should be invincible and you see others getting in your way, that is going to cause paranoia.