**
About 105,000,000 people turned out to vote in the 2000 Presidential election. 51% of the eligable voting population doesn’t sound so bad to me.
And since when is jingoist the same as being fascist? Of course you Europeans seem to think that flag waving of any kind makes one a jingoist.
Marc
Merriam Webster provides:
Main Entry:fascism
Pronunciation:*fa]shizm, *faa], *fai] also ]*si- sometimes f] or f]
Function:noun
Inflected Form:-s
Etymology:Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, political group + -ismo -ism
1 often capitalized : the principles of the Fascisti; also : the movement or governmental regime embodying their principles
2 a : any program for setting up a centralized autocratic national regime with severely nationalistic policies, exercising regimentation of industry, commerce, and finance, rigid censorship, and forcible suppression of opposition b : any tendency toward or actual exercise of severe autocratic or dictatorial control (as over others within an organization) the nascent fascism of a detective who is not content merely to do his duty George Nobbe early instances of army fascism and brutality J.W.Aldridge a kind of personal fascism, a dictatorship of the ego over the more generous elements of the soul Edmond Taylor
Main Entry:jingoism
Pronunciation:-izm
Function:noun
Inflected Form:-s
Etymology:2jingo + -ism
: clamorous chauvinism or arrogant nationalism especially marked by a belligerent foreign policy warfare generates jingoism Barbara Ward belligerent jingoism and narrow isolationism J.F.Kennedy
The Bush administration is most certainly jingoistic.
I think it is also worth noting that the poor level of education this country (the U.S.) has been sliding into during the last quarter century combined with the rise of sound-bite talk radio political analysis tends to make people very cynical about politics and keeps them away from the polls.
I think it was Fenris who started that Pit thread recently bitching about people who provide dictionary definitions as “proof” in a GD. DP, thanks for the definition, but please relate the definition to Bush’s foreign policy. As it stands, you haven’t proved a thing.
Sua
Le Pen is accused for being anti-semite, but have at the same time a pretty hard nail toward arabs and muslims.
Many jews voted for him because he wanted to throug out many arabs.
POWER_station, that is called a “rationale” for your assertion. It is not a source - it is your opinion. Kindly provide a source - such as an exit poll of Jewish voters in France.
Sua
to back any claim with ‘facts’ or figures. I didn’t launch this thread as a vehicle for propagating propaganda, I am truly interested to hear what the rest of the obviously intelligent participants are saying. No one will be converted by this discussion anyway…
So just be decent with us and back at least one of the many claims you have made thus far with something that looks like fact…if you can’t do that feed us some better rhetoric… please do so we don’t all think you’re just a bigot, ignorant, loser.
I cut that for som reason… here’s the right one:
What’s your problem POWER_station?
So far you have managed to feed us one biased and poorly argued claim after the other and you have yet to back any claim with ‘facts’ or figures. I didn’t launch this thread as a vehicle for propagating propaganda, I am truly interested to hear what the rest of the obviously intelligent participants are saying. No one will be converted by this discussion anyway…
So just be decent with us and back at least one of the many claims you have made thus far with something that looks like fact…if you can’t do that feed us some better rhetoric… please do so we don’t all think you’re just a bigot, ignorant, loser.
I just point at some of the facts for Le Pen’s success in France
An increasing number of non-western immigrants (France have Europs largest number of immigrants)
increasing crime rate (especially among immigrants)
corruption among the more established politicans
EU (Le Pen know that many french are sceptical to the new EU, euro and the enormous bureucracy
Anti-globalization (Le Pen is nationalistic and not very open to the rest of the world)
I’m not a fan of Le Pen, but I think that many political parties should follow a strikter line when it comes to immigration.
I just point at some of the facts for Le Pen’s success in France
An increasing number of non-western immigrants (France have Europs largest number of immigrants)
increasing crime rate (especially among immigrants)
corruption among the more established politicans
EU (Le Pen know that many french are sceptical to the new EU, euro and the enormous bureucracy
Anti-globalization (Le Pen is nationalistic and not very open to the rest of the world)
I’m not a fan of Le Pen, but I think that many political parties should follow a strikter line when it comes to immigration.
::sigh:: these same idiots who are bitching about immigration in Europe are the same ones bitching about any attempt to reform pensions. Here’s a clue - the current pension systems in most European countries are dependent upon contributions from current workers. And in just about every European country, the population is greying - birth rates have declined, so without immigration there won’t be enough workers in 20 or so years to pay the pensions of Le Pen’s voters - unless there is heavy immigration.
And part of the price of immigration is a temporary increase in crime. This isn’t due to the race of immigrants, but instead because (1) poverty breeds crime, and most immigrants are poor, and (2) language (and the attitude of Le Pen voters and others) makes it more difficult for recent immigrants to successfully become part of the “white” economy.
Butcha know, in everything in life there are trade-offs. Deal.
Sua
Sua, You’re a star!
and POWER_station… the debate is regarding whether dwindling electorate is fueling the extreme right wing vote or if the growing extreme right wing parliamentary representation is a reflection of a real increase in fascist support.
It is NOT about why there is support for the extremists nor if it is justified.
That debate I’ll only have with you at the polls with the rest of the electorate…or that is what I hope at least.
There is another thread where you can take your issues called ‘French elections: Le Pen getting to second round?’… if you must.
POWER_station, for goodness’ sake, please stop spouting opinion without backing it up. Go and do some research, then come back and post links to cites.
Firstly I am not claiming that any possible ‘fascist tide’ is necessarily marked by increased violence against immigrants. I am talking about proto fascist or fascist parties with marked nationalistic and xenophobic agendas entering into government. Violence against foreigners, or persons of minority, or other race unfortunately occurs under the helm of most leaderships. It is also hard to quantify.
Now; my argument was that lethargy in the electorate possibly grows the platform for fascism. The theory would go as follows: let’s assume that there is a fascist movement for reasons which we do not care about for the moment. It has a solid and faithful portion of the voters behind it. There is an agenda of change and dissatisfaction at its core as would be mostly the case. If the general electorate abandons its right to vote in any substantial way, even small changes in the percentage of voters supporting fascism will have deep impact since it is less probable that these voters abstain. This seems to be the case in France. Le Pen and FN only gained 3% to 1995 while the Socialists lost 15% and the Gaullists lost over 10%. Some of that went to Le Pen and some went to all the petty candidates. However, a large portion seems to have eroded in the 7% drop in vote participation.
Decreasing vote participation is a fact across the western world. To give a few examples; Italy lost over 7% in the last 20 years out of which 5% eroded in the 90s. Austria lost 17% out of which 8% in the 90s. France lost over 5 percent between 81 and 95 and 7% to this one (that might change for the finals…I hope) And on like that it goes… The US stands apart as the only Western democracy were the portion of the voting age population exercising its right swings between 35% and 50% from one presidential election to the other, with little foreseeable trend. Note also that the average for parliamentary elections in Europe is over 80% while it rests just above 60% for the US. I think that’s worth a thread in itself so I’ll leave that be.
For more figures on voter turnout: http://www.idea.int
So that might be the answer… On the other hand why are these people staying home? And when Le Pen or Haider or Berlusconi gets landslide votes (relatively speaking) why do I hear so many ‘non-supporters’ like POWER_station express sympathy with the agendas they didn’t vote for?
Maybe it’s not just lethargy…maybe we are voting by not voting…maybe this is what we want…God forbid!
Sparculees, I wanted to send you this in a private email, but you’ve requested no emails to be sent via the board. Remarks such as:
are frowned upon in Great Debates by the kindly adminstrators of the SDMB (take it to the pit - there’s already a thread where people are expressing their frank opinions about POWER_station - enjoy yourself ;)). Wouldn’t want anything to happen to your posting rights.
Thank you for the pointer jjimm… and I appologize to anyone offended including POWER_station… its a hot topic and somewhat hard to be cold headed about. But then again taht would be the core of the problem in some ways wouldn’t it just.
Oh, yes, the evil immigrants.
Considering the treatment of, say, the treatment of Algerians during the war and all of the racism current in the country.
Consider that foreign nationals- even ones who have become citizens- cannot be functionnaires. That’s 1/4 of the public work force right there.
Consider that more than that percentage of the private sector has measures making it impossible for immigrants to get jobs (you must have the BAC, ect).
Consider the socioeconomic disadvantages that make it harder for the poor to pass the BAC in the first place. Hint: There is a correlation between wealth and academic success in many cases.
The government and French society is already actively discriminating against these people. Clearly everything they get is their fault. :rolleyes:
Why can’t the french vote for a government that takes their interests first and everyone elses second? Not that I condone the facist tide, but I think the french reserve the right for them to vote for they whoever they want.
I mean say if you saw you country being replaced with people from other lands other areas, you wouldn’t like it would you? Or if you saw a government more concerned about the people who work for it and not crime or immigration there are the main facts that concern most people and this is what drives them to vote for the most ’ Extreme’ parties.
Nobody is stopping them…which is obvious from the past Sunday’s poll. It’s a basic aspect of democracy. That doesn’t mean that you have to like their choices nor that you couldn’t debate it, which would be the basis of free speech.
Well, to anyone of multicultural sensibilities, to any historicist, or to any immigrant that comes across as being a little hard to swallow.
First of all…who’s land is it? I prefer to believe in the maybe tired, but spiffy old saying ‘You’re borrowing the land from the generations to come’. Now we obviously don’t know them and we won’t, but with history as a yard stick we can be darned sure they’ll be a pretty motley mixture out of an origins perspective. Second your statement begs for a definition of ‘other lands other areas’ are you saying that the folks in Sussex had better stay out of Norfolk? or maybe that I should skedaddle out of continental Europe and go back to Scandinavia? (that would, BTW be illegal in the EU to demand as it violates a constitutional right of mine) or does this only apply to persons of non-European descent? Thirdly…since you ask; I love it!
Well this would obviously be the perception in France and I surmise, sadly enough many other places. Self-serving bureaucracy, corruption, nepotism and power abuse are major enemies of democracy. That people react with outrage I cheer and support, that they exercise their right to vote against it is a fundamental need and right, even if I might dislike their choice. That they stay away from the polls in disillusionment on the other hand points to a deeper crisis, and in my viewpoint opens up the risk of non-democratic elements coming into power…hence this thread.
Sad but true… However, I might be a little slow here, but are you trying to say that there are European governments who are not concerned about crime and immigration? Surely you mean ‘are not concerned in the way I want them to be’, or what? And once again…why do these two concepts constantly end up in the same sentence, but never do the twain connect via economic policy, oppression of minorities and non-equal opportunity to work? Stating them like this implies that immigration=crime=immigration=crime… But that’s impossible! There is no such thing as inherent criminality due to origin, nor does crime disappear when immigration does and vice versa.
The only thing I hate worse than a Commie is a Commie who doesn’t understand what Communism stands for. A (if not the) basic premise of Communism is that divisions based on race or nationality are artificial divisions foisted upon the proletariat to divert them from their own interests. The only real and appropriate division is that of class - the needs of the proletariat are paramount.
And guess what the overwhelming majority of immigrants are - in any country at any point in history? They are proletarians. Seriously, man, have you ever thought about the rallying cry of Karl Marx - “Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains!”?
Far be it for me to point out that Marx wrote most of his works as an immigrant in England?
Sheesh.
Sua
AMEN Sua!
I wonder if we aren’t speaking into deaf ears though…