Comeback kid Sarkozy ?

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm left speechless.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm not up on the minutiae of French politics, nor do I have a dog in the fight (obviously), so can someone basically give me a short summary of why Sarkozy seemed so beatable until recently? Is it just jobs/economy stuff or something else?

There are several reasons that are adding up. First of all is, of course, the economy. Not only the economy, but the fact Sarko's policies are perceived as ufair, with tax cuts favoring the wealthier coupled with austerity measures hurting the lower and middle classes (like the pensions reform). The idea is now settled among French people that the government is supporting the interests of a wealthy minority at the expenses of the "people". This is a very important issue in France, as strange as this may sound in the USA.

There is also a "cultural" issue : Sarkozy's style of government has been very different from that of his predecessors. From De Gaulle to Chirac, French Presidents have tended to adopt a very solemn, quasi-Monarchic attitude, speaking rarely and often in vague terms, letting the PM handle the everyday political job. Instead, Sarkozy has acted in a way which was seen as childish and unpresidential by a lot of people, especially conservative one. His constant politicking, the way he marginalized the PM and the cabinet and seems to be deciding of everything, his authoritarian style toward his own party, but also his aproach toward money and luxury (the so-called "bling-bling" attitude), or his vulgar language... All this has pissed off al lot of people who just think he doesn't behave as a President.

Now, why is he surging back ? Well, first of all because people are idiots who tend to forgive forget everything. Ask yourself how Chirac managed to win in 1995, or how people bought into Mitterrand's revolutionary speech in 1965-81 after he had been a cabinet minister during the whole time of 4th Republic. And of course, because Hollande has led a horrible campaign, coupling major missteps (like the electoral agreement with the Greens which pissed off everybody) to a general inability to say anything meaningful. Hollande still hasn't clarified any of the ambiguities regarding his platform, hasn't managed to come with a meaningful idea, hasn't managed to inspire people with his dull rhetoric. He's, basically, an epic fail of a candidate.

I've no idea how this will end up. It's still a long road for Sarkozy to win, but we all know he will do his best to be reelected. Hollande still has some time to develop a meaningful campaign, so at this point everything can happen. Maybe he has willingfully decided to start his campaign later on. Still, the PS has managed to transform an unlosable election into a potential defeat. That's absolutely pathetic.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Why people like Antonio, or Belgiansocialist are so much in love with the EU when the union has done more than any other single institution or organisation to prevent and roll back Socialist policies in Europe.

I'm not some kind of utopist living in dreamland, SC. I'm well aware on EU's flaws, which are enormous and disgusting. I hate the way the Commission works without any actual mandate from the European People, I hate the fact they enact failed neoliberal policies, the fact selfish countries always refuse any progress in common solidarity, the fact Germans have imposed their retarded austerity dogma and are ready to ruin every country to maintain it. However, I also realize that without the EU, European countries are even more screwed. As weak as European integration is, the little bit we have is still indispensable and we'll need more in the following years. In the word's globalized economy, countries which represent 1% of the world population and face a massive demographic ageing won't be remain competitive for long, and especially won't be able to sustain comprehensive welfare states as multinational corporations grow stronger. European federalism is the only way for Europe to survive as one of the world's power, to escape the natural decline we are starting to experience. Not the European Federalism as we know it, but real European federalism : with a democratic federal government, elected by the European people and which has an effective power over national government. Why is it so hard to understand ? Why do you Euroskeptics systematically take commitment to the europeist ideal as a support to EU as it currently exists ? Why the possibility to reform EU and correct its flaws rather than outright disbanding it is always discarded ? This is what I don't understand.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Ah but the thing is that I don't even like the idea of full European integration in theory. The fact that the EU is an authoritarian, undemocratic institution now only makes my opposition more practicle.

OK, I see... It's only a pretext.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Except that institutions are not people and can be reformed, as long as there are enough people who want to reform them. Unless you can prove us how and why EU is inherently bad an unavoidably has to become an authoritarian neoliberal technocracy, you've got no point at all.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Except that institutions are not people and can be reformed, as long as there are enough people who want to reform them. Unless you can prove us how and why EU is inherently bad an unavoidably has to become an authoritarian neoliberal technocracy, you've got no point at all.

If corporations can be people in America why can't institutions be people in Europe?

But to be serious, I'm sure the EU could be reformed if it had the democratic structure to let the people decide. That isn't how it is now. Any radical change to the nature of this organisation would have to happen from the top down, and the top has no intrest in what so ever to dimish it's own powers and make it-self responsible to voters. Truly I have seen no top european politician from either side of the spectrum do anything to try to make the EU more democratic.

As for market liberalism, yes that is an inevidable part of the union. It's part of the founding documents, every single treaty since and 60 years of CJEU court precedent. It is as much a part of the EU as the federalism itself   

Aren't the EU treaties negotiated by national governments ? If only there were a strong demo-europeist political movement in Europe, they could be able to push forward a reformist agenda and eventually negotiate a new treaty transforming the nature of the EU. Some steps forward already have been made, with the EU parliament being stronger now than it was in the 80s. However, most of them have been ruined by the anti-Europeans, who don't care about democratic reforms because they think the EU IS BAD!1!!!1!

Of course some countries would never support such a federalist agenda. That's why I think UK, for example, should be kicked out, and that the 2004-2007 expansions were major mistakes.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Aren't the EU treaties negotiated by national governments ? If only there were a strong demo-europeist political movement in Europe, they could be able to push forward a reformist agenda and eventually negotiate a new treaty transforming the nature of the EU. Some steps forward already have been made, with the EU parliament being stronger now than it was in the 80s. However, most of them have been ruined by the anti-Europeans, who don't care about democratic reforms because they think the EU IS BAD!1!!!1!

Of course some countries would never support such a federalist agenda. That's why I think UK, for example, should be kicked out, and that the 2004-2007 expansions were major mistakes.

So in other words you do not support the EU at all, you just support a European federal state, but you think that if (and that's a big if) by a chance one day a qualified majority of EU member states would happen to have goverments with the same leftiest EU ideal as you at the same time they could potentionally pass a treaty that would overturn 90% of the things the union has stood for in decades transforming it into something it has never been as long as we kick out the United Kingdom and other possible states that might be opposed... good plan. It all makes much more sense now.

Outright pulling out of the EU would make even less sense, though. Apart from the obvious economic consequences of closing border and coming back to weak national moneys, it would overturn the few steps forward EU has already done. Improving what we already do have seems a bit more realistic than destroying everything and getting back to the beginning.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Who said anything about closing the borders? You do realize that one can have open borders without the EU?That doesn't really make much logical sense.

Of course you can have open borders without the EU. It happens that the Schengen agreements were one of the things EU brought. It's hard to see it existing without the EU, especially if nationalist feelings keep developing the way they have in the last years.

 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course, if you take the ridiculously simplistic and silly position scapegoating the Euro and miss the real reasons for the crisis. However, I'm so tired of having to constantly argue against the conventional wisdom that I'd apreciate if we could agree to disagree. Otherwise, have a look at some of my past posts as an indication of my feeling of the topic.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL, I can't believe you are being serious.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_referendum_on_the_European_Constitution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_referendum_on_the_European_Constitution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-eighth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_Bill,_2008_(Ireland)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My argument is that the EU isn't as good as it could be, but it has at least the merit to exist. The EU won't necessarily save Europe, but Europe certainly won't survive without the EU. Also, I never said I'm strongly in favor of the EU in its current form : I'm strongly in favor of a democratic European Federation, and therefore there is no way I can like EU as it is today. So, what should we do ? Dismantle everything and start from the beginning, so that we cause new disagreements and have to take 50 more years just to rebuild what we've destroyed ? Or rather work on what we already have, reform it, improve it, expand it, and eventually reach our goal ? I find it funny how you seem to think the first option is the most realistic.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I thought this thread was about Sarkozy. Silly me.

Any discussion about Sarkozy can hardly go beyond "LOL" or "sigh". There isn't much left to say after that.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes, right now he seems to have stopped the bleeding and remains in the high 50s. A lot of things can happen in 3 months and half, however.