Political Correctness gone mad
-
Paul Riley wrote: we have problems because we're getting into the same litigious state of mind as the US. I don't even understand why you have made two separate countries ! ;P And you don't even need a prime minister, a White House spokeman would be enough. Oh sorry, I didn't realized it was done already :laugh: Paul Riley wrote: This is a problem that's spreading across the Western World, I'm afraid Yes, it's raising here too. The chance we have is that lawyers don't get the right to advertise, and can't claim for a percentage on what they may get for the defendant, so it's less a question of money than to find systematically a responsible, even for accidents. Paul Riley wrote: Stopping films like Willow because it singles out little people as being different No, I wouldn't, as long as the movie isn't based on making fun of them, not as individuals, but as a category. It would be racism. Paul Riley wrote: [edit] 6ft = 183cm [/edit] Thx for the convert ! Paul Riley wrote: Very funny but no less personally degrading than dwarf tossing. Would you like to stop him showing that or is it different when it's for charity? I wouldn't in this case, 'cause I consider that "comic actors" are like old-time buffoons, they deserve a more important freedom of speech in public. Paul Riley wrote: Can I ask what your first language is French, of course :) Which other western culture could be so opposed to yours ? :-D The main problem when writting in english is I lack the words I need to express myself precisely. French is great for this, we can be very very precise in our thoughts and expression. The one who isn't misanthropist when 40 years old never loved human kind Qui n'est pas misanthrope à 40 ans n'a jamais aimé les hommes Nicolas De Chamfort (1740-1793)
Karl wrote: I don't even understand why you have made two separate countries ! Cause then Bush wouldn't have an ally in Europe and that just wouldn't do :-D. I'm only half joking there. About 14 months ago there was a growing contingent in this country who were crying out to talk about joing the US instead of the EU. I myself had been screaming about this for years. The fact is that we have common interests with the US while the EU is a dangerous game; some countries need a rising Euro against a falling dollar, others need a falling Euro against a rising dollar. Then Tony Blair actually stated that President Bush would prefer that we enter Europe "so that he has a strong ally there". About 13 months ago (I'm sure I don't need to explain the reference), everyone here started to realise that President Bush was even more gung-ho than our own Presi Prime Minister (and without the huge parliament/congress majority to back him up). The majority of the public here would now rather go it alone for now than join the EU or the US :-D. Karl wrote: Yes, it's raising here too. The chance we have is that lawyers don't get the right to advertise You people don't give anyone the right to a living, do you? I have to admit though that I can see the benefits of that one :). What confuses me a little though is that when Le Penn pulled off his shocking victory over the left wing party in your elections, we kept hearing about what a bitter blow it was to the left wing party. We kept hearing about how you had to choose between the right wing and the hard-right. If this is the right wing that stops lawyers advertising and dwarfs from being tossed, I'd hate to see what your left-wing is like :). Karl wrote: No, I wouldn't, as long as the movie isn't based on making fun of them, not as individuals, but as a category. It would be racism Well, Madmartigan does keep calling Willow "Peck" or "Shorty" but Madmartigan is meant to be an anti-hero who starts off hating the little people and ends up loving them. So I'm not sure it could be called racist. But then again, the definition of racist in France seems to be much different than it is here. On one hand you can't say anything derogatory about any single minority group of people because it's racist; on the other hand most French people I know seem to think the two main political subjects to be discussed at any time are immigration and crime and
-
Karl wrote: I don't even understand why you have made two separate countries ! Cause then Bush wouldn't have an ally in Europe and that just wouldn't do :-D. I'm only half joking there. About 14 months ago there was a growing contingent in this country who were crying out to talk about joing the US instead of the EU. I myself had been screaming about this for years. The fact is that we have common interests with the US while the EU is a dangerous game; some countries need a rising Euro against a falling dollar, others need a falling Euro against a rising dollar. Then Tony Blair actually stated that President Bush would prefer that we enter Europe "so that he has a strong ally there". About 13 months ago (I'm sure I don't need to explain the reference), everyone here started to realise that President Bush was even more gung-ho than our own Presi Prime Minister (and without the huge parliament/congress majority to back him up). The majority of the public here would now rather go it alone for now than join the EU or the US :-D. Karl wrote: Yes, it's raising here too. The chance we have is that lawyers don't get the right to advertise You people don't give anyone the right to a living, do you? I have to admit though that I can see the benefits of that one :). What confuses me a little though is that when Le Penn pulled off his shocking victory over the left wing party in your elections, we kept hearing about what a bitter blow it was to the left wing party. We kept hearing about how you had to choose between the right wing and the hard-right. If this is the right wing that stops lawyers advertising and dwarfs from being tossed, I'd hate to see what your left-wing is like :). Karl wrote: No, I wouldn't, as long as the movie isn't based on making fun of them, not as individuals, but as a category. It would be racism Well, Madmartigan does keep calling Willow "Peck" or "Shorty" but Madmartigan is meant to be an anti-hero who starts off hating the little people and ends up loving them. So I'm not sure it could be called racist. But then again, the definition of racist in France seems to be much different than it is here. On one hand you can't say anything derogatory about any single minority group of people because it's racist; on the other hand most French people I know seem to think the two main political subjects to be discussed at any time are immigration and crime and
Paul Riley wrote: Cause then Bush wouldn't have an ally in Europe and that just wouldn't do You're perfectly right. UK was and is the american Trojan Horse to slow European integration. Accepting UK in EU was probably the biggest mistake we made. Since then, UK blocked every progress which wasn't in the economical area. Paul Riley wrote: we kept hearing about what a bitter blow it was to the left wing party We have several left parties here: The Socialists, The Greens, The Communists, two Trotskists parties... Each of them had its candidate for the first round of the presidential election. We never had have so much candidates. The result was that left votes were really dispersed among all the left candidates (Our constitution says that the two candidates who can continue at the second round of the presidential election are the two first of the first round). Another point was that during the campaign the right parties mainly focused their speaches on security problems, well helped by private television (The number of reports about violences was TEN TIMES more important before the election than after: a real mind manipulation). Right parties often attract electors by causing their fear: before 1989 the fear was about communists (the old legend of the knife between the teeth), now it's about the delinquents (often assimilate to immigration). The presence of Le Pen at the second round was a big shock and a big shame for us (It was the first time ever I voted for a right candidate and a candidate I really don't like). But the left people have shown their attachment to our Republic. Be sure that if we had a second round between the National Front and the Socialist Party, the victory of the democracy would not have been so great, 'cause many right voters would have prefered to vote Le Pen or abstain than vote for a socialist. Paul Riley wrote: most French people I know seem to think the two main political subjects to be discussed at any time are immigration and crime and that the rise in the latter is directly attributable to the rise in the former. Yep, a lot of French were convicted by the media and the right wing that they were the reasons for all problems. The old scape-goat tactic often works. Paul Riley wrote: Your attitudes cried out French while your grasp on the structure of the English language cried out anything but French Thanks to the Internet ! I progressed a lot talkin
-
Paul Riley wrote: Cause then Bush wouldn't have an ally in Europe and that just wouldn't do You're perfectly right. UK was and is the american Trojan Horse to slow European integration. Accepting UK in EU was probably the biggest mistake we made. Since then, UK blocked every progress which wasn't in the economical area. Paul Riley wrote: we kept hearing about what a bitter blow it was to the left wing party We have several left parties here: The Socialists, The Greens, The Communists, two Trotskists parties... Each of them had its candidate for the first round of the presidential election. We never had have so much candidates. The result was that left votes were really dispersed among all the left candidates (Our constitution says that the two candidates who can continue at the second round of the presidential election are the two first of the first round). Another point was that during the campaign the right parties mainly focused their speaches on security problems, well helped by private television (The number of reports about violences was TEN TIMES more important before the election than after: a real mind manipulation). Right parties often attract electors by causing their fear: before 1989 the fear was about communists (the old legend of the knife between the teeth), now it's about the delinquents (often assimilate to immigration). The presence of Le Pen at the second round was a big shock and a big shame for us (It was the first time ever I voted for a right candidate and a candidate I really don't like). But the left people have shown their attachment to our Republic. Be sure that if we had a second round between the National Front and the Socialist Party, the victory of the democracy would not have been so great, 'cause many right voters would have prefered to vote Le Pen or abstain than vote for a socialist. Paul Riley wrote: most French people I know seem to think the two main political subjects to be discussed at any time are immigration and crime and that the rise in the latter is directly attributable to the rise in the former. Yep, a lot of French were convicted by the media and the right wing that they were the reasons for all problems. The old scape-goat tactic often works. Paul Riley wrote: Your attitudes cried out French while your grasp on the structure of the English language cried out anything but French Thanks to the Internet ! I progressed a lot talkin
Karl wrote: You're perfectly right. UK was and is the american Trojan Horse to slow European integration. I'm not convinced that's quite true. We are there initially for our own purposes but there's no question that the US supports us being there because our interests are theirs. It would be much more sensible for us to become more connected to the US rather than Europe but then good sense doesn't count for a lot in these matters. :( Without being too pessimistic, I fear that we're heading towards the situation described at the start of Orwell's 1984 (the film largely ignored this but it's really key to the story), where Britain constantly switches between two great powers with both accepting them purely to piss the other power off. I'm sure it will never get as far as Orwell's vision but there's already some scary similarities. Karl wrote: Accepting UK in EU was probably the biggest mistake we made. Since then, UK blocked every progress which wasn't in the economical area. You give us a lot more credit than we deserve. We don't have the power to block anything if everyone else wants it. What we do is swing the balance against German-French total control over the rest of the EU. This is for the good of those lesser nations who would fall under that control but it does no favours to ourselves or to the French and Germans. In the end nothing happens because, as I said before, there is no Europe-wide common interest. Looking at how the UN has turned out after half a century, it doesn't bode well for the long-term future of the EU. I'm sure France and Germany would like to blame the UK because it avoids accepting what a mess the entire deal is. Karl wrote: We have several left parties here... etc Thanks for that, I knew some of it and you've filled in the gaps nicely. My point, however, wasn't how it happened (though I do find it a good case study for those who complain about two-party political systems) but how your right-wing party can be acting more left-wing than our supposedly left-wing government :-D. Karl wrote: Yep, a lot of French were convicted by the media and the right wing that they were the reasons for all problems. The old scape-goat tactic often works. Hmmm... yes... I probably shouldn't get into bitching about the media, this conversation has been long already and I suspect I'd only be "preaching to the converted" :-D. Karl wrote:
-
Karl wrote: You're perfectly right. UK was and is the american Trojan Horse to slow European integration. I'm not convinced that's quite true. We are there initially for our own purposes but there's no question that the US supports us being there because our interests are theirs. It would be much more sensible for us to become more connected to the US rather than Europe but then good sense doesn't count for a lot in these matters. :( Without being too pessimistic, I fear that we're heading towards the situation described at the start of Orwell's 1984 (the film largely ignored this but it's really key to the story), where Britain constantly switches between two great powers with both accepting them purely to piss the other power off. I'm sure it will never get as far as Orwell's vision but there's already some scary similarities. Karl wrote: Accepting UK in EU was probably the biggest mistake we made. Since then, UK blocked every progress which wasn't in the economical area. You give us a lot more credit than we deserve. We don't have the power to block anything if everyone else wants it. What we do is swing the balance against German-French total control over the rest of the EU. This is for the good of those lesser nations who would fall under that control but it does no favours to ourselves or to the French and Germans. In the end nothing happens because, as I said before, there is no Europe-wide common interest. Looking at how the UN has turned out after half a century, it doesn't bode well for the long-term future of the EU. I'm sure France and Germany would like to blame the UK because it avoids accepting what a mess the entire deal is. Karl wrote: We have several left parties here... etc Thanks for that, I knew some of it and you've filled in the gaps nicely. My point, however, wasn't how it happened (though I do find it a good case study for those who complain about two-party political systems) but how your right-wing party can be acting more left-wing than our supposedly left-wing government :-D. Karl wrote: Yep, a lot of French were convicted by the media and the right wing that they were the reasons for all problems. The old scape-goat tactic often works. Hmmm... yes... I probably shouldn't get into bitching about the media, this conversation has been long already and I suspect I'd only be "preaching to the converted" :-D. Karl wrote:
Paul Riley wrote: You give us a lot more credit than we deserve. You're right, it's not true anymore. This behaviour happened during the Tatcher area, helped by the european rules of those days, which obliged to get unanimity on important decisions. Paul Riley wrote: What we do is swing the balance against German-French total control over the rest of the EU the France/Germany couple has been the motor of EU quiet since its beginning. The weakening of this relationship is IMHO the reason for the current deceleration of european integration. I hope it will change in the future months, thanks for example to someone like Joschka Fisher. Paul Riley wrote: how your right-wing party can be acting more left-wing than our supposedly left-wing government What we called here ultra-liberalism (or Tatcherism) is not very popular, far from that. A government couldn't be elected here with these kind of arguments (Thanks God ! ;) ). And as you said, your supposedly left-wing government wouldn't get the same classification here :-D Paul Riley wrote: yet few have picked up English like you have. I don't consider myself as a typical French, far from that. At best I'm part of a small minority, and IMHO I and my ideas can't be considered as representative. Paul Riley wrote: Besides, we English-speakers are well known for being too lazy to learn someone else's language when we can just get them to learn ours Is it really laziness ? I would think it's more a lack of opening to other people and cultures (which is common for islanders ;) ) .You know, English are probably as arrogant as French are, it's a characteristic of hegemonic cultures (and it's probably the reason why we have clashed so many times in ours Histories) Best Regards, The one who isn't misanthropist when 40 years old never loved human kind Qui n'est pas misanthrope à 40 ans n'a jamais aimé les hommes Nicolas De Chamfort (1740-1793)
-
Paul Riley wrote: You give us a lot more credit than we deserve. You're right, it's not true anymore. This behaviour happened during the Tatcher area, helped by the european rules of those days, which obliged to get unanimity on important decisions. Paul Riley wrote: What we do is swing the balance against German-French total control over the rest of the EU the France/Germany couple has been the motor of EU quiet since its beginning. The weakening of this relationship is IMHO the reason for the current deceleration of european integration. I hope it will change in the future months, thanks for example to someone like Joschka Fisher. Paul Riley wrote: how your right-wing party can be acting more left-wing than our supposedly left-wing government What we called here ultra-liberalism (or Tatcherism) is not very popular, far from that. A government couldn't be elected here with these kind of arguments (Thanks God ! ;) ). And as you said, your supposedly left-wing government wouldn't get the same classification here :-D Paul Riley wrote: yet few have picked up English like you have. I don't consider myself as a typical French, far from that. At best I'm part of a small minority, and IMHO I and my ideas can't be considered as representative. Paul Riley wrote: Besides, we English-speakers are well known for being too lazy to learn someone else's language when we can just get them to learn ours Is it really laziness ? I would think it's more a lack of opening to other people and cultures (which is common for islanders ;) ) .You know, English are probably as arrogant as French are, it's a characteristic of hegemonic cultures (and it's probably the reason why we have clashed so many times in ours Histories) Best Regards, The one who isn't misanthropist when 40 years old never loved human kind Qui n'est pas misanthrope à 40 ans n'a jamais aimé les hommes Nicolas De Chamfort (1740-1793)
Karl wrote: This behaviour happened during the Tatcher area Thatcher! If I hadn't known you were French I may have been confused for a minute there, but I know French don't like "TH" ;P But seriously, was Thatcher seen as a US puppet? I'm surprised by that. I know Thatcher and Reagan were close but I always felt they were two strong leaders with the same psychotic power trip. I am aware that she wasn't popular in Europe because she always felt Britain should have veto control over everything, but I didn't realise she was seen as a puppet. Interesting. Karl wrote: the France/Germany couple has been the motor of EU quiet since its beginning. The weakening of this relationship is IMHO the reason for the current deceleration of european integration. I hope it will change in the future months, thanks for example to someone like Joschka Fisher. I'm not sure I see that as a good thing for Europe as a whole. On one hand, it does mean that things get done; on the other hand it means that two countries get to control the economic interests of 12-15 countries who may not benefit as much as those two. It's a difficult predicament. We have a saying in politics here: "We don't care who wins as long as it's a landslide", because it's true that without a powerful control mechanism nothing gets done which is bad for everybody. So I can, in a way, see that it benefits no one to have the current situation; but I can also see that with total French/German control, anyone else who benefits will be seen more as a positive side-effect than a priority. I'm inclined to suggest that the United Europe will only ever work if it becomes a federal entity, like the US. But that's an incredible suggestion with the language and interest barriers that currently exist. One thing we can agree on though: it's to the benefit of both the EU and the UK that we don't join at this time. Karl wrote: What we called here ultra-liberalism (or Tatcherism) is not very popular Ultra-liberalism? Another surprise. Thatcher was renowned for ultra-conservatism, which is why she was popular early in her term (while people still remembered the problems of 70s union control). But as I've said before, the further left you go the more right you become. It's really hard to distinguish between ultra-liberalism and ultra-conservatism. Karl wrote: I don't consider myself as a typical French, far from that.
-
Karl wrote: This behaviour happened during the Tatcher area Thatcher! If I hadn't known you were French I may have been confused for a minute there, but I know French don't like "TH" ;P But seriously, was Thatcher seen as a US puppet? I'm surprised by that. I know Thatcher and Reagan were close but I always felt they were two strong leaders with the same psychotic power trip. I am aware that she wasn't popular in Europe because she always felt Britain should have veto control over everything, but I didn't realise she was seen as a puppet. Interesting. Karl wrote: the France/Germany couple has been the motor of EU quiet since its beginning. The weakening of this relationship is IMHO the reason for the current deceleration of european integration. I hope it will change in the future months, thanks for example to someone like Joschka Fisher. I'm not sure I see that as a good thing for Europe as a whole. On one hand, it does mean that things get done; on the other hand it means that two countries get to control the economic interests of 12-15 countries who may not benefit as much as those two. It's a difficult predicament. We have a saying in politics here: "We don't care who wins as long as it's a landslide", because it's true that without a powerful control mechanism nothing gets done which is bad for everybody. So I can, in a way, see that it benefits no one to have the current situation; but I can also see that with total French/German control, anyone else who benefits will be seen more as a positive side-effect than a priority. I'm inclined to suggest that the United Europe will only ever work if it becomes a federal entity, like the US. But that's an incredible suggestion with the language and interest barriers that currently exist. One thing we can agree on though: it's to the benefit of both the EU and the UK that we don't join at this time. Karl wrote: What we called here ultra-liberalism (or Tatcherism) is not very popular Ultra-liberalism? Another surprise. Thatcher was renowned for ultra-conservatism, which is why she was popular early in her term (while people still remembered the problems of 70s union control). But as I've said before, the further left you go the more right you become. It's really hard to distinguish between ultra-liberalism and ultra-conservatism. Karl wrote: I don't consider myself as a typical French, far from that.
Paul Riley wrote: she was seen as a puppet You're right, she was more a Reagan clone than a puppet, but a least a virulent anti-European. Paul Riley wrote: Ultra-liberalism? Another surprise. "ultra-liberalism" has here an economical signification, and I suppose it's different for you. An "ultra-liberal" person is here someone who is against any State intervention and think that everything should be regulated by the Market only. Because of our strong culture of public services, we are often opposed to this point of view. For example, because of European regulation, our national electricity maker and provider (EdF) should be privatized. Be sure that it won't be done easily, 'cause we are very happy with EdF (98 to 99% of satisfied customers !), and fear it will become as unreliable as your railways or Health care services if privatized (moreover, 80% of our electricity is made from Nuclear Power Plants, so it would be cool not to do some savings on them) About France and Germany, the issue is IMHO less economical than political. EU needs to have some countries which push it forward politically, and till the 90's the main "motor" was French-German partnership. It would be cool if others countries take this role, but it doesn't seem to happen. I agree with you about Federation, it would be the solution. I don't think languages could be an insuperable barrier, as Belgium and Switzerland demonstrate it. IMHO, UK is blocked in its secular politic of maintening European balance, and try know to do the same across Atlantic. I think it's a mistake, 'cause as you said, UK would remain on the edge. About US, I think you may be disillusioned. I'm not sure US would sustain you as you sustain them. I'm thinking this because of an article I read in the Guardian, about a book written by one of the Thatcher ministers, who explained the lack of support of US during Falklands war, when France has given all its support to UK. God is dead. Nietzsche Nietzsche is dead God
-
Paul Riley wrote: she was seen as a puppet You're right, she was more a Reagan clone than a puppet, but a least a virulent anti-European. Paul Riley wrote: Ultra-liberalism? Another surprise. "ultra-liberalism" has here an economical signification, and I suppose it's different for you. An "ultra-liberal" person is here someone who is against any State intervention and think that everything should be regulated by the Market only. Because of our strong culture of public services, we are often opposed to this point of view. For example, because of European regulation, our national electricity maker and provider (EdF) should be privatized. Be sure that it won't be done easily, 'cause we are very happy with EdF (98 to 99% of satisfied customers !), and fear it will become as unreliable as your railways or Health care services if privatized (moreover, 80% of our electricity is made from Nuclear Power Plants, so it would be cool not to do some savings on them) About France and Germany, the issue is IMHO less economical than political. EU needs to have some countries which push it forward politically, and till the 90's the main "motor" was French-German partnership. It would be cool if others countries take this role, but it doesn't seem to happen. I agree with you about Federation, it would be the solution. I don't think languages could be an insuperable barrier, as Belgium and Switzerland demonstrate it. IMHO, UK is blocked in its secular politic of maintening European balance, and try know to do the same across Atlantic. I think it's a mistake, 'cause as you said, UK would remain on the edge. About US, I think you may be disillusioned. I'm not sure US would sustain you as you sustain them. I'm thinking this because of an article I read in the Guardian, about a book written by one of the Thatcher ministers, who explained the lack of support of US during Falklands war, when France has given all its support to UK. God is dead. Nietzsche Nietzsche is dead God
Karl wrote: she was more a Reagan clone than a puppet, but a least a virulent anti-European I could argue that Reagan was more a Thatcher clone than vice versa but otherwise I'd agree with you. Karl wrote: An "ultra-liberal" person is here someone who is against any State intervention and think that everything should be regulated by the Market only. Ahh, I see. In that case, yes, it would apply to Thatcher. Within certain limits, it would apply to me too :) Karl wrote: 'cause we are very happy with EdF Interesting. I can see why Eurpe might impose such a regulation. Privatisation has been proved (largely) to be to the benfit of the customer. Certainly, apart from RailTrack, privatisation has been very successful here. Remember that the problems with our health serivces are within the nationalised sector, not within private organisations. Karl wrote: About France and Germany, the issue is IMHO less economical than political. EU needs to have some countries which push it forward politically And therein lies the problem. Politically you are absolutely correct, there do need to be strong forces controlling the European position, rather than being a mess of conflicting countries who couldn't agree on anything. But those forces will always impose their will economically and that's what the rest of Europe is afraid of. Karl wrote: I don't think languages could be an insuperable barrier, as Belgium and Switzerland demonstrate it. I don't think it should be a problem, but I think it will be because discussion is the road to understanding. Look at this conversation. We started off from completely opposing viewpoints, now you and I both have a better understanding of each other's opinions and have even found some common ground. Next time I hear someone bitching about French liberalism, I can say "to be fair" and explain the opposing point of view, even if I don't feel it myself (and I will do). This has to happen between all people of all nations before a Federal European Nation could ever exist. It's no good having only politicians understanding each other, they're all just faceless Eurocrats to the people and the people have to be sold on the idea of a federal europe before it can work. So yes, language barriers will always be a factor. In the same way, national pride should never be an issue, but it would be.
-
Karl wrote: she was more a Reagan clone than a puppet, but a least a virulent anti-European I could argue that Reagan was more a Thatcher clone than vice versa but otherwise I'd agree with you. Karl wrote: An "ultra-liberal" person is here someone who is against any State intervention and think that everything should be regulated by the Market only. Ahh, I see. In that case, yes, it would apply to Thatcher. Within certain limits, it would apply to me too :) Karl wrote: 'cause we are very happy with EdF Interesting. I can see why Eurpe might impose such a regulation. Privatisation has been proved (largely) to be to the benfit of the customer. Certainly, apart from RailTrack, privatisation has been very successful here. Remember that the problems with our health serivces are within the nationalised sector, not within private organisations. Karl wrote: About France and Germany, the issue is IMHO less economical than political. EU needs to have some countries which push it forward politically And therein lies the problem. Politically you are absolutely correct, there do need to be strong forces controlling the European position, rather than being a mess of conflicting countries who couldn't agree on anything. But those forces will always impose their will economically and that's what the rest of Europe is afraid of. Karl wrote: I don't think languages could be an insuperable barrier, as Belgium and Switzerland demonstrate it. I don't think it should be a problem, but I think it will be because discussion is the road to understanding. Look at this conversation. We started off from completely opposing viewpoints, now you and I both have a better understanding of each other's opinions and have even found some common ground. Next time I hear someone bitching about French liberalism, I can say "to be fair" and explain the opposing point of view, even if I don't feel it myself (and I will do). This has to happen between all people of all nations before a Federal European Nation could ever exist. It's no good having only politicians understanding each other, they're all just faceless Eurocrats to the people and the people have to be sold on the idea of a federal europe before it can work. So yes, language barriers will always be a factor. In the same way, national pride should never be an issue, but it would be.
Paul Riley wrote: Privatisation has been proved (largely) to be to the benfit of the customer I would say for some (probably the majority of) customers. For example, about electricity, what about people living in isolated parts of the country ? Do they pay the same price than others ? Do they benefit from competition ? For me, the equality of all citizens (yes, not subjects, citizens ;P) across all the territory is more important than economic considerations, even if I have to pay electricity a little more. After all, our national "slogan" is "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity". Paul Riley wrote: what the rest of Europe is afraid of. Others european countries have probably bad memories about French and German imperialisms, but I hope these times are over Paul Riley wrote: No one in France would vote for an Englishman for prime minister Yes, probably not, because you're politically too different. But I'm not sure it would be the same with a German, a Spanish or an Italian. And since I voted once for the right-wing, I think everything is possible. Paul Riley wrote: At least as a State we would gain all these things You would also loose the kingdom, and I thought you are pretty attached to your Queen, aren't you ? Paul Riley wrote: and they still use Imperial measurements And it's a total non-sense :-D ! (Just for fun, calculate with Imperial measurements the surface of a house knowing its width (let's say 7 yards and 3 feet) and its length(9 yards 2 feets), then make the calculation using metric system :) ) Paul Riley wrote: France's actions over Sangatte and our own BSE crisis have put a poison in our relationship I'm not sure Sangatte have a great influence on French opinion about UK (What about the opposite ?). BSE has more, but we assimilate that to search for profit before other considerations, so we blame more liberalism than UK. Another issue, more important, is the refusal of UK to extrade a terrorist (Rachid Ramda), held for responsible for several deadly terrorist attacks in Paris in 1995. Paul Riley wrote: I can say "to be fair" and explain the opposing point of view, even if I don't feel it myself (and I will do). It may be another thing we have in common :) . I generally disagree with everyone, whatever he thinks, because IMHO there's always two ways to handle a p
-
Paul Riley wrote: Privatisation has been proved (largely) to be to the benfit of the customer I would say for some (probably the majority of) customers. For example, about electricity, what about people living in isolated parts of the country ? Do they pay the same price than others ? Do they benefit from competition ? For me, the equality of all citizens (yes, not subjects, citizens ;P) across all the territory is more important than economic considerations, even if I have to pay electricity a little more. After all, our national "slogan" is "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity". Paul Riley wrote: what the rest of Europe is afraid of. Others european countries have probably bad memories about French and German imperialisms, but I hope these times are over Paul Riley wrote: No one in France would vote for an Englishman for prime minister Yes, probably not, because you're politically too different. But I'm not sure it would be the same with a German, a Spanish or an Italian. And since I voted once for the right-wing, I think everything is possible. Paul Riley wrote: At least as a State we would gain all these things You would also loose the kingdom, and I thought you are pretty attached to your Queen, aren't you ? Paul Riley wrote: and they still use Imperial measurements And it's a total non-sense :-D ! (Just for fun, calculate with Imperial measurements the surface of a house knowing its width (let's say 7 yards and 3 feet) and its length(9 yards 2 feets), then make the calculation using metric system :) ) Paul Riley wrote: France's actions over Sangatte and our own BSE crisis have put a poison in our relationship I'm not sure Sangatte have a great influence on French opinion about UK (What about the opposite ?). BSE has more, but we assimilate that to search for profit before other considerations, so we blame more liberalism than UK. Another issue, more important, is the refusal of UK to extrade a terrorist (Rachid Ramda), held for responsible for several deadly terrorist attacks in Paris in 1995. Paul Riley wrote: I can say "to be fair" and explain the opposing point of view, even if I don't feel it myself (and I will do). It may be another thing we have in common :) . I generally disagree with everyone, whatever he thinks, because IMHO there's always two ways to handle a p
Karl wrote: I would say for some (probably the majority of) customers. For example, about electricity, what about people living in isolated parts of the country ? Do they pay the same price than others ? Do they benefit from competition ? Yes on all counts. I am one of those in an outlying area and the only privatised company that treats me differently from other customers is BT. They don't charge any more but they're not willing to extend ADSL services because they can't make enough money. I've whined enough on that subject in this forum but I don't blame it on privatisation, I suspect it would be the same (possibly worse) if it were nationalised. Karl wrote: French and German imperialisms, but I hope these times are over Quite. We have exactly the same problem as I'm sure you're aware :( Karl wrote: Yes, probably not, because you're politically too different. But I'm not sure it would be the same with a German, a Spanish or an Italian. Really? It wouldn't happen here, whatever the nationality. We had enough problems convincing people that a national football manager could be a Swede! Karl wrote: You would also loose the kingdom, and I thought you are pretty attached to your Queen, aren't you ? I'm not. I'd happily lose them, but I'm equally happy to keep them as long as the majority of people want to. Polls tend to show 50-60% of people in favour of the monarchy but admittedly polls are usually held after discussions about the Queen's £56m wage bill, rather than after discussions about how much money they bring in through tourism. So yes, I'd say a majority are still in favour. BUT... if it came down to a choice, I wonder how many would hold to that. Since the commonwealth has proved itself completely useless over the last 12 months (esp. in not dealing with Robert Mugabe), I don't see a lot of point in holding onto the past like that. Karl wrote: And it's a total non-sense ! I know, I know. I'm not going to try to justify imperial over metric, it's just not possible. But a lot of people have a problem with it when they're used to imperial (my wife can't handle conversions at all). The only thing I strongly object to there is that people have actually been jailed for refusing to sell in metric. Karl wrote: I'm not sure Sangatte have a great influence on French opinion about UK (What about t
-
Karl wrote: I would say for some (probably the majority of) customers. For example, about electricity, what about people living in isolated parts of the country ? Do they pay the same price than others ? Do they benefit from competition ? Yes on all counts. I am one of those in an outlying area and the only privatised company that treats me differently from other customers is BT. They don't charge any more but they're not willing to extend ADSL services because they can't make enough money. I've whined enough on that subject in this forum but I don't blame it on privatisation, I suspect it would be the same (possibly worse) if it were nationalised. Karl wrote: French and German imperialisms, but I hope these times are over Quite. We have exactly the same problem as I'm sure you're aware :( Karl wrote: Yes, probably not, because you're politically too different. But I'm not sure it would be the same with a German, a Spanish or an Italian. Really? It wouldn't happen here, whatever the nationality. We had enough problems convincing people that a national football manager could be a Swede! Karl wrote: You would also loose the kingdom, and I thought you are pretty attached to your Queen, aren't you ? I'm not. I'd happily lose them, but I'm equally happy to keep them as long as the majority of people want to. Polls tend to show 50-60% of people in favour of the monarchy but admittedly polls are usually held after discussions about the Queen's £56m wage bill, rather than after discussions about how much money they bring in through tourism. So yes, I'd say a majority are still in favour. BUT... if it came down to a choice, I wonder how many would hold to that. Since the commonwealth has proved itself completely useless over the last 12 months (esp. in not dealing with Robert Mugabe), I don't see a lot of point in holding onto the past like that. Karl wrote: And it's a total non-sense ! I know, I know. I'm not going to try to justify imperial over metric, it's just not possible. But a lot of people have a problem with it when they're used to imperial (my wife can't handle conversions at all). The only thing I strongly object to there is that people have actually been jailed for refusing to sell in metric. Karl wrote: I'm not sure Sangatte have a great influence on French opinion about UK (What about t
Paul Riley wrote: We have exactly the same problem as I'm sure you're aware Don't worry about us: England has left since 1904 the place of hereditary enemy it owned for 7 centuries (except during 6 Nations tournament :-D ) Paul Riley wrote: Really? It wouldn't happen here, whatever the nationality It's harder (it should be) for us to be so nationalistic, because our country is made of population mixing since its gallic beginning, and our culture is quiet good to integrate people from different origin. The problem is often that the descendants of immigrate population may be more racist than the ones who disparage their parents or grand-parents ! Paul Riley wrote: I strongly object to there is that people have actually been jailed for refusing to sell in metric Dura lex, sed lex...It's true it's a little bit harsh to jail someone for this, but being part of European union UK has to respect the rules. Forcing tradesmen to use metric system is perhaps the solution for the next generations to use it easily. It's always hard to change references, we have seen that with the disparition of our national currency for the Euro. A lot of people (and not only older ones) here still make the conversion Franc/Euro for every price their ear, even if the conversion isn't easy (the factor is 6.55957). It's stupid, 'cause Franc doesn't and won't exist anymore, but people are generally to lazy to force themselve to change their practice. Paul Riley wrote: I was quite impressed by the speech announcing the closure the other week It's like closing hospitals to stop a disease. The closure won't change anything, on the contrary, it's just a political annoucement. The center was first opened because illegal immigrants wandered through North towns like tramps, waiting an occasion to cross the channel. Now the center closed, illegal immigrant will spread through the country as before, with less control and more delinquency. There are already evidences than clandestine organisations now use the Rouen and Cherboug harbors. Paul Riley wrote: Not ONE European country came and said "How can we help?" Every single one said "Stupid British farmers, shut down the borders." It was also a good occasion to do some protectionism... Food quality is here a very, very important matter. Everything in this area is very sensitive and very emotional. The fact than England continued to