Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • The only new thing, is that it will be too short to present/explain/compare seriously the different programs...

    Otherwise it seems it will be as usual in France :
    • People only talking about what others did wrong
    • People talking about the "affaires"
    • People making vague promises that they will forget as soon as they'll be elected...
    • No serious real debate

    The worst is that it's true for each party !
    (I can give example, if asked)

    It sometimes makes me sick to hear them complaining about the people's lack of

    • As I said in my previous entry on the subject, campaigns aren't where politics happen. Never, not in any country that I know. To a certain extent, this can be considered "logical". The goal of the campaign is to win the elections, and then the politics happen (or not ;-)

      I totally agree that this is not optimal, but in the past having genuine public debates has proven disastrous as any well-developed idea is broken by the simplest demagogy. One thing that I find a pity is that the programs are available, but that they don't reflect enough of what the party actually thinks. At least, that's the case for the PS and Les Verts. I saw the programs discussed, I know what the government consellors that will be in place if those parties succeed have in mind with some fair degree of precision, but the texts are much shorter than that. I'm not sure how to fix this (at this point).

      People only talking about what others did wrong/ the "affaires"

      There are two sides here. The first one is that I don't think that's totally true. That's pretty much all that there is on TV, but in other media there's more. The second one is that there's one candidate in the mix -- Chirac -- that has done a lot more "affaires" than all the others put together. So that justifies mentionning it imho.

      People making vague promises that they will forget as soon as they'll be elected

      I don't think that's totally fair. I won't hide the fact that I'm left-wing, and that while there are a few promises that I was counting on that didn't make it, I also saw quite a few that imho were held. Simply thinking of the 35 hour work week, the PACS (non-discriminating civil contract), the faultless divorce, the regularisation of "sans-papier" which while imho insufficient was already large, the reduction of unemployment; and more within our domains: the internetisation of administration (almost everything is accessible there now, and still progressing. The current plan being to create a "citizen's account" in which all administrative procedures will be grouped, with the possibility of following their progress and other such features), the fight against software patents, the internetisation of government (there was only one computer in Matignon in 1997, and it wasn't connected...), etc.

      So, overall, I agree that it's imperfect but 1) there is campaign information available (though not yet enough and 2) some candidates are imho demonstrably better than others ;) Now as to why I'm excited, to begin with I do take the time to access some information on what's going on, and then I'm politicized enough that I find elections exciting no matter what. Finally, my cynical half wants blood and mud-slinging ;-) but that doesn't account for most of it honestly.

      --

      -- Robin Berjon [berjon.com]

      • I hope you won't take it for a personnal attack, but what you say is a perfect illustration of what I dislike in politician politic :

        The goal of the campaign is to win the elections, and then the politics happen (or not ;-)
        Sorry but no, Call me an idealist but I thought it should be a moment when everybody would present/share/compare his Ideas to make the things better.
        Now every people involved in politic find it normal to see it ONLY as a race to win (Should I underline that the reach for power total
        • The goal of the campaign is to win the elections, and then the politics happen (or not ;-)

          Sorry but no, Call me an idealist but I thought it should be a moment when everybody would present/share/compare his Ideas to make the things better.

          Well, autarch, this is one place where I absolutely agree with you. Democracy fails in the current American election system, because Democracy (in America) is supposed to be where the people decide how the country should be governed. And that is not what happens.

          O

          • I don't know if that could help one way or another, but there's a law in France that guarantees that all candidates have equal access to televised speech. Such laws are hard to evaluate and put into practice, but overall I think it helps. Those rules are possible because the french legal system differentiates between free speech and free press, and puts the former above the latter. I'm not sure how that would map into the american approach to free speech, which is notoriously different.

            There are al

            --

            -- Robin Berjon [berjon.com]

        • First and foremost, I don't take this as a personal attack. This is a discussion site, if I didn't want people to voice their opinions I'd turn comments off. I hope you don't take anything personally either.

          Second, while I'm a member of the PS for pragmatic reasons (ie I want to be involved in politics, and it is the best option I could find after moving through a number of parties) I am clearly not representative of the main tendencies of the party -- I'm probably on the most leftist branch, and c

          --

          -- Robin Berjon [berjon.com]