• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

French Election Results: Le Pen Beaten by Tactical Voting

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
I support Anti-Fascism, but it is very much a legacy of the Far-Left bias. Are you saying that we should let [potential] Fascists recieve representation at the national or regional level?

Well do you have a problem with the Front de gauche? They are communists. The kind of people who put you into camps (if you're lucky) for having too much wealth.

Also when you write Fascism, which do you mean? Italian Fascism was actually quite not so horrible. German Fascism not so much.
And "potential" Fascists? That's quite uncertain.

Whether you like it or not ~30% of the French electorate has voted repeatedly for Front National. Meanwhile due to the French voting system the party representation is not what it should be regarding their percentage of the electorate, be it the Senate, National Assembly, Regional, General or Municipal Councils.
Do I have to explain why this is bad for a political system?


France had once Proportional Representation for the National Assembly. The Front National immediately gained almost 10%.
After that "fiasco" they quickly changed the system back to cement their basically two party rule.
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Well do you have a problem with the Front de gauche? They are communists. The kind of people who put you into camps (if you're lucky) for having too much wealth.

Also when you write Fascism, which do you mean? Italian Fascism was actually quite not so horrible. German Fascism not so much.
And "potential" Fascists? That's quite uncertain.

Whether you like it or not ~30% of the French electorate has voted repeatedly for Front National. Meanwhile due to the French voting system the party representation is not what it should be regarding their percentage of the electorate, be it the Senate, National Assembly, Regional, General or Municipal Councils.
Do I have to explain why this is bad for a political system?

France had once Proportional Representation for the National Assembly. The Front National immediately gained almost 10%.
After that "fiasco" they quickly changed the system back to cement their basically two party rule.

Neither fascists nor communists don't care what you think (at least if they actually know what they are doing). When they control the state, you are their property, you will follow their orders and if you don't, they will kill you. it is a simple matter of breaking you down by sheer force and they have no inhibition about tourturing you if they think it will get results. human rights and the law are for display purposes only and elections are retained to legitimise a one-party state. the international community generally can't and won't do anything about them. both of them use terror against people they suspect will not comply with their orders. there is no presumption of innocence or due process of law. they are quite comfortable killing the innocent if the alterantive means letting the "enemy" slip through their fingers. private loyalities such as to freinds and family members are sacrificed in order to wage the race war or the class struggle.

neither communists nor fascists will care about democracy, or how the people vote. it is irrelevant because the will of the people is secondary to the belief in their historic mission, whether it be in terms of class, race or nation. the people will vote for who they are told to. however, they are not stupid. they will use democratic institutions to their advantage and use whatever rights they can to achieve power. They are also pathological liars , to whom they regard as their enemies or the useful idiots who can serve as tools for them to achieve power. this can include their own members. They excell at concealing their true intentions when it is in their interests to do so. the most terrifying aspect of either system is not simply how comfortable they are with violence, but how easily they can turn millions of people into their willing accomplices. people are more than happy to give up their freedom for the right price. it is true there are significant differences between them, but they share a common commitment to expidency as a revolutionary and dictatorial ethics. this doesn't mean they are "bad" or "evil" though, as most of the things they do have historically been done by their liberal, democratic counter-parts. The difference is that the former still adhere (mainly) to the rule of law. the law is a social contract and is only as valid as the will of both parties, the government and the governed, to stand by it and enforce it. the other two, systems couldn't care less about the law.

It is however unclear whether Front National is a "fascist" party, but is described as "authoritarian, nationalist and populist". Fascism is however notiourly difficult to define because it is a amagamation of popular prejudices, so I reserve the right to call Front National Fascist. Communism does have a clear ideological system, but is so "dialectical" that it can take almost any shapes that is necessary to advance the cause. Admittedly this is not the 1930's, but it is important not to take the existence of democractic institutions for granted. Nobody knows exactly what such people do until they get power, and then power is used as an ends rather than a means. by that point it is too late to stop them. In the short-run, yes, it is bad for the system, but it does save alot of problems in the future if that is the road they were to go down.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Holy cow, Laika, you sound almost as cynical as I am.
biggrin.gif
 

AnnaCzereda

Active Member
@Laika While it makes perfect sense what you say, there is the other side of the coin. Too often people who are not politically correct get labeled as Fascists, Nazis or Nationalists (this is the mildest label) just because they point out the bull**** while others prefer sweeping it under the rug. That was exactly the case with no-go zones and this is the case with the increasing number of rapes committed by Muslim immigrants. In Germany, women are regularly raped in the refugee camps by male pseudo-refugees, who are in the majority. But of course, we must help all those "poor people" even if we can't control what's going on in the refugee camps, right? So it's better to pretend that the problem doesn't exist. Multiculturalism simply doesn't work. Many Muslim immigrants aren't just going to assimilate, hence the ghettos. LePen simply highlights the problem and says that something must be done about it. Whether she would manage to deal with it if she gained power is another question. It's easy to say, hard to do, but from what I know, she doesn't propose the "final solution" for all the Muslim immigrants, just stricter control of the borders and deporting those who break the French law. While I think she simply calculates and tries to capitalize on the fear of terrorism, it's obvious she's also demonized by the media.

The same is happening in my country. The party that now rules Poland is called nationalist, far right, even Nazi because it points out the bull****. The party that ruled before just can't come to terms with their defeat. Can you imagine what press Poland now has? All the newspapers worldwide keep screaming that Poland is on its way to dictatorship, that democracy is in danger, the government breaks the constitution, ignores citizens' rights and what not. But I live here and see people organize demonstrations from time to time, some media support the government, others keep *****ing against it, nothing is censored so am I missing something? The same was when some politician claimed that the refugees can bring some diseases to Poland. That caused the moral outrage coming mainly from liberal journalists and politicians and he was immediately compared to Hitler. Was he wrong? Didn't the immigrants drag cholera to Greece at one time?

When Viktor Orban started building the fence on the borders, the moral outcry followed and he was accused of being inhuman and not caring about European solidarity. Now the whole Europe is talking about the necessity of strengthening the borders. Besides, most nationalist parties of today tend to go soft once they get power. It's mainly due to the fact that they must appeal to the mainstream electorate in order to win the elections and, if they win, they often have to form coalitions. The National Front of Marine LePen is much milder than the National Front of her father. Polish nationalists also used to give a Heil Hitler salute at parties but when they got into the European and national parliaments, they started singing to a different tune. Power and money can spoil even the most naively idealistic and silly young people. Some of them are now damn celebrities driving expensive cars. They have no interest of fighting capitalism and liberal democracy.
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
@Laika While it makes perfect sense what you say, there is the other side of the coin. Too often people who are not politically correct get labeled as Fascists, Nazis or Nationalists (this is the mildest label) just because they point out the bull**** while others prefer sweeping it under the rug. That was exactly the case with no-go zones and this is the case with the increasing number of rapes committed by Muslim immigrants. In Germany, women are regularly raped in the refugee camps by male pseudo-refugees, who are in the majority. But of course, we must help all those "poor people" even if we can't control what's going on in the refugee camps, right? So it's better to pretend that the problem doesn't exist. Multiculturalism simply doesn't work. Many Muslim immigrants aren't just going to assimilate, hence the ghettos. LePen simply highlights the problem and says that something must be done about it. Whether she would manage to deal with it if she gained power is another question. It's easy to say, hard to do, but from what I know, she doesn't propose the "final solution" for all the Muslim immigrants, just stricter control of the borders and deporting those who break the French law. While I think she simply calculates and tries to capitalize on the fear of terrorism, it's obvious she's also demonized by the media.

The same is happening in my country. The party that now rules Poland is called nationalist, far right, even Nazi because it points out the bull****. The party that ruled before just can't come to terms with their defeat. Can you imagine what press Poland now has? All the newspapers worldwide keep screaming that Poland is on its way to dictatorship, that democracy is in danger, the government breaks the constitution, ignores citizens' rights and what not. But I live here and see people organize demonstrations from time to time, some media support the government, others keep *****ing against it, nothing is censored so am I missing something? The same was when some politician claimed that the refugees can bring some diseases to Poland. That caused the moral outrage coming mainly from liberal journalists and politicians and he was immediately compared to Hitler. Was he wrong? Didn't the immigrants drag cholera to Greece at one time?

When Viktor Orban started building the fence on the borders, the moral outcry followed and he was accused of being inhuman and not caring about European solidarity. Now the whole Europe is talking about the necessity of strengthening the borders. Besides, most nationalist parties of today tend to go soft once they get power. It's mainly due to the fact that they must appeal to the mainstream electorate in order to win the elections and, if they win, they often have to form coalitions. The National Front of Marine LePen is much milder than the National Front of her father. Polish nationalists also used to give a Heil Hitler salute at parties but when they got into the European and national parliaments, they started singing to a different tune. Power and money can spoil even the most naively idealistic and silly young people. Some of them are now damn celebrities driving expensive cars. They have no interest of fighting capitalism and liberal democracy.

You have my respect for challanging me on this, as I felt my last post was fairly ferocious. Sorry, the unpleasant feeling I get realising what communists did still gets me. it's like the ground opening up and falling into oblivion when you realise you are on the same side as the "bad guys".

I'm angry because I really wish I could turn the tide and just try to protect people from supporting the far-right. the truth is, is that there supporters are as much victims as they people they hurt. the same is true for the far-left. they want change, they want to feel better about the world, make their lives better and have become frustrated and want "radical" solutions. they have legitimate greivances, and they aren't going to get heard on TV. that's true of the people who join ISIL. but neither of us are going to get the change we really want by a "vote first, ask questions later" approach. I'm pretty happy to say that even after 26 years since the fall of the berlin wall, the communists are still cowardly stalin wannabes. I shouldn't be surprised. we've been told over and over again, "keep voting, it will be different this time". do we really want to take the risk with the far right? have things gone that far that human rights abuses don't bother us anymore?

it is fair to say that the "moral outrage" is often demonstrated by people who have little reason to. They just pick sides and repeat the party line and submerge their conscience with a particular ideology and don't look at the facts. it feels safer than "waking up". that's true on both sides (and I'm happy for you to include me in that as it has been true for many years, and still is to some extent). I didn't know about the Rapes in Refugee camps. the context I picked for understanding it was, is that Syria is really the opening salvo of a problem that will continue for much of the century. Climate change will lead to massive population movements and the amount of venom that gets poured over this issue, often with little or not relveance to statistics in the tabloid press, is a "storm in a teacup" compared to what will probably develop later on. the Syrian refugee crisis is really the first time that thousands of people have been crossing the borders into otherwise stable european countries. we are being rudely awakened from our complacency and of course, people lurch to the far-right because they think it is the refugees that are the threat. yes, it is possible for them to bring over disease. yes, it is possible some of them are terrorist undercover for ISIL. But this is stuff that is all eerling close to talking about them as the "surplus population" and that there is not enough "living space" to cloth, house these people or give them jobs. we are, collectively, some of the richest people on the planet, turning away some of the poorest. poverty is brutialising, so is war and dictatorship, so is fleeing from everything you know. they aren't going to be saints. I can't phrase it in some inspiring poetry about our "humanity" because that's bull****. most of us couldn't care, and even if we did- as individuals our ability to do anything about it is very limited. I am deeply concerned about how comfortable we are becoming with things that once belonged in the fringes.

To be honest, I am fed up with the "moral outrage" by people who use the mass media and public opinion as a weapon by which to judge others, but then do absoutely NOTHING about an issue. its naracassitic, self-righteous and renders every freedom that people ever fought for to a state of utter futility because how they feel is more important than what actually happens. go to a concert, make hand gestures in a vast crowd with a celebrity nonenity about how we're going to get "change", wear a wrist band, buy a t-shirt, feel better about it, go home, turn on the TV and nothing happens. **** all. it's not surprising the far-right is flourishing given the state our democracies are in. or for a moment the fact that ISIL wants to blow **** up; its looks good and probably feels a hell of alot better than the gutter "democracies" where we are staged managed by the "opinion formers" who sell us excuses for why they didn't live up to the empty promises of the last election. of course, for me it be the far-left; same story- different t-shirt. but when you start to be honest about the amount of violence involved in either, it gets uncomfortable. I really don't want to enter the kind of hell hole where people like Stalin and Hitler stop being in the history books and we are doing an excellent job of making that happen. I can barely justify to myself defending liberalism or thinking of how it might survive given that it's only selling point is "it could be worse", but I wish people put some thought into what they are actually voting for before they waved the flag and wear the t-shirt. even that would make it a little bit harder. its getting too easy to be an extremist of any kind for this to end well. you'll have to forgive if I am not eager to see where this is going.

And on the subject of Vicktor Orban, how did we go from Hungarians trying to flee their own country because the soviet built a wall to keep them in so they can run tanks overthem, to hungarians building a wall to keep the "muslims" out?

if this sounds like incoherent babble, my apologies, but I'm practically frothing with rage that things have got so bad, voting for the far right is even considered credible. I don't know who to be more pissed at the voters or the establishment.
 

AnnaCzereda

Active Member
I used to be that angry at the far right and all kinds of radicals in the past. Now I just say bleh, partly because I'm older and more apathetic and partly because I don't really see the radicals. Usually, I see scarecrows pulled out by the liberal politicians to discredit their politically incorrect opponents. I don't know that much about the National Front but I know how the right wing parties are demonized in my own country. Voting is always a risk. The danger to democracy can come from many sides, also from the movements that claim to be liberal and democratic. It's enough to convince the gullible citizens to willingly give up the large portion of their constitutional rights in the name of security. The ISIS is a convenient scarecrow. No coup d'etat is necessary.
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The danger to democracy can come from many sides, also from the movements that claim to be liberal and democratic. It's enough to convince the gullible citizens to willingly give up the large portion of their constitutional rights in the name of security. The ISIS is a convenient scarecrow. No coup d'etat is necessary.

This, I can agree on. I'll try not to rant this time but yes the far right is demonised and yes it is almost always from a position of ignorance. we have largely mythologised the holocaust, the nazis and world war II till it has become meaningless and have become desensitised to the problem. In all probability my response to this thread has been because of that. It is however a "trend" that the far-right is doing well nowdays accross europe and america and it seems likely, that despite years of propganda against them, we are going to have to re-learn the lessons of the past as we were too certain that we are able to stop them, whilst simultaneously turning them into a myth that has no relationship to the human reality. we forget what mades these people tick and are to have to go through this all over again.
 
Top