The current situation in France

[velcorin]

Unlike some of the fluffy, unresearched articles I've seen in British newspapers, covering the current social unrest in France, I thought this was excellent. Hopefully non-French speakers better insight into what is happening here in France. Please read carefully, it will explain the anger and frustration people have towards Sarkozy (big effort not to call him anything else) and his Govn.

 http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,725250,00.html

[idun]

What an excellent article.

[Quillan]

Beat me to it idun, very good, concise and gets the points over very well. Shame you have to go to the German press.

[velcorin]

Best European paper by a million miles for sensible, well-researched, well written, non-political information. Followed by the Economist.......in my humble opinion.

And Le Parisien** for all the murders, kidnappings, etc. Real France[:D]

(**Oppps can't spell. My French teacher won't be happy, and I'll be sleeping in the spare room again)

[Will]

Yes, the article gives a very fair summary. There are many parallels between the way Sarkozy is going about reforms and the way Thatcher did things, the main difference being that Thatcher managed to put prior measures in place to reduce the potential power of industrial action.

The only thing I might disagree with is the weight given to government sleaze. In this respect, the Sarkozy administration is no different from its predecessors, so that's not a reason on its own for it to be so disliked. But taken in combination with the confrontational, nanny-knows-best style, it is certainly a good reason to mistrust the French government.

[velcorin]

[quote user="Will"]
The only thing I might disagree with is the weight given to government sleaze. In this respect, the Sarkozy administration is no different from its predecessors, so that's not a reason on its own for it to be so disliked. But taken in combination with the confrontational, nanny-knows-best style, it is certainly a good reason to mistrust the French government.[/quote]

I think the big difference this time, is that it was discussed openly in the press. (Like it would in Britain.) Previously, with Mitterand's parallel family, and Chirac's fictional employees (etc, etc, etc......), the media did a good impression of the 3 Monkeys. The dawn of the internet?

[woolybanana]

Is it really such a good article?

It fails to define the causes of the French malaise which are much deeper than the style of Sarkozy or the minor corruption of his government.

It fails to see the frustration in French society caused by the tension between the public propaganda of France as a great and prosperous world power and the reality that it is weak and grasping, with a falling standard of living, and that it can no longer go on blaming other people for its weakness.

Between the State and all its overbearing ramifications and the private individual who is increasingly crushed by it, to the point of not bothering any more or buggering off to London or elsewhere where possible.

France is not even the leader of Europe any more, as the Germans have taken over and the French now cling on to their coat tails like hungry beggars. And that perception is beginning to be understood at the grass roots

Social problems are not being addressed because vested interest groups don't want them to be, particularly the deeply racist heart of France that just wants brown people to go away and not be seen or heard except in old movies where the French Foreign Legion battles and beats the Berbers or whoever in the great empire of the Sahara.

Nor is there an alternative figure of leadership to Sarkozy as the Left are an indefined mass, except Melonchon who is getting attention for his Trot rant but not being taken seriously.

Sarkozy articulates some of these fears; after all, did people really object when he pursued the Roms - not a bit of it. But he is such a ridiculous figure that there is no way people can take PRIDE in him or that he can patronize and manipulate the populace as did Mitterand and Chirac.

In short, he is not worthy of the job, that is why he is hated, and because he has not followied the usual channels and greased the usual palms to get his reforms adopted, which would, by the way, have been substantially the same if he had, I suspect.

[woolybanana]

Though France has lost a plac e in the corruption tables:

http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/actualite/economie/20101026.OBS1868/indice-de-perception-de-la-corruption-la-france-perd-une-place.html

[velcorin]

Don't disagree with you, it's all part of the mix. France could with a good bit of Brit navel-gazing..........and actually doing something about it's problems. Recent history does not bode well on that point.

[woolybanana]

Because, I think, it has reached the end of the distant, over-centralized, paternalistic State model and needs badly to federalize and spread power very widely - eg to the schools and Univeristies which have to manage themselves, though this latter has just begun (over the protests of some I noticed). Thus people might identify more readily with their state and develop a model which suits local needs.

The paralysis comes from an ability to let the reins of power go, in other words, to trust the people to do it themselves. Now, where have I heard that before?

[NormanH]

Yet I will continue to live in France, and die here, because my son could have become President

[woolybanana]

And not a Queen or King? Just look at Cromwell.

[NormanH]

If only the Commonwealth or the Levellers had managed to succeed .

Then we could really have spoken about a GREAT Britain

[woolybanana]

Then GB would have been run by the likes of Arthur Scargill and would have sombred in the ooze of the marsh for ever

[NormanH]

No it would have been like the USA, with all the disadvantages.

[cooperlola]

[quote user="woolybanana"]Then GB would have been run by the likes of Arthur Scargill and would have sombred in the ooze of the marsh for ever[/quote]That pre-supposes that the Arthur Scargills of this world would have been necessary or would have flourished in a society whose ideologies were different.  Militants thrive when people feel they are being unjustly treated.  Just look around you to see what I mean!

[suein56]

[quote user="woolybanana"]Then GB would have been run by the likes of Arthur Scargill ...[/quote]

OH and I lived in rural Nottinghamshire during Arthur's time in high power; he wasn't called 'King Arthur' for nothing as he 'ruled' with a rod of iron. Many people were frightened of him and his minions.

Sue

[woolybanana]

Norman, UK is too small to have had a US type structure; there would have been a series of nasty little civil wars and eventual consolidation, as in France.

[MrCanary]

You make some good points, woolybanana...

[woolybanana]

Must have been drunk, don't remember a thing![;-)]

[Patf]

I've asked a few locals whether they support the strikes, and why people are so upset about pensions.

This is a rural area, and the main gripe seems to be the unfair differences in pension levels and conditions between the agriculteurs and the fonctionnaires.

They say the mess should have been sorted out years ago, but was put off because it's politically unpopular. Sarkozy is the first to dare to take it on.

Our doctor also said that the pension system needs to be re-organised.  But was annoyed about the petrol shortage (naturally.)

[Judith]

This is a most interesting topic - and one I wish I could contribute to more than I can.  Whilst I keep an eye on French news and have enough French friends with whom I meet, I have yet to get to the stage where we talk this sort of subject together - I still spend quite a lot of my time correcting their views of the UK.  (And, inevitably, many of them are already retired). But, I do feel that I see things differently from the other English (or Irish or whatever) in my French class.  They were only concerned about the lack of petrol - whereas I can see that the pension problem is the "marking" of actually a much wider malaise, which has been evident in France for some time, never mind the fact that the French are past masters as believing they are badly done to  (when often they are not!).

Since we moved, we have chatted less to our French neighbours, mainly because instead of a maison de village we now have gardens etc (as do all our neighbours). 

Today , in the supermarket, I heard more French than English (thankfully as I know there are loads of English around), and they all seem to be moaning about the weather, and the nearness of Toussaint and Christmas!

[Nimportequoi]

I wonder what the situation would be like if Mitterand hadn't reduced the retirement age from 65 to 60 in 1982?

In my experience, most of the French people I know are happy with the demonstrations as most dislike Sarkozy and the way he has forced through the legislation without debate. However most (except the fonctionnaires) agree that the retirement age has to be raised. Whether there are any companies who will be willing to employ people over the age of 55 is another matter.

[NormanH]

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/andreas-whittam-smith/andreas-whittam-smith-frenchstyle-segregation-is-coming-to-a-town-near-you-2118255.html

[woolybanana]

Segregation exists already in the big cities; how many poor live in Chelsea, for example?