[Closed] So these French Elections

TandemJeremy - Member
racism is one component of a nazi philosophy....

...as is religious intolerance 😆

TYJ - learn the lessons from yesterday and from your bans. Please lets not have a repeat.

Nothing to do with what I want - no one wants economic or social chaos for obvious reasons. The Euro project (in its current form) will fail for the simple reason that it is based on flawed foundations. Politicians of all parties have been dishonest with their populations and the recent agreements were such an obvious fudge that all of this is inevitable. For that reason, people across Europe (not just me!) and now waking up to this deceipt and correctly questioning the legitimacy of the political elites. Like Marie Antoinette, these people have bought this on themselves with their dishonesty.

I am agnostic about the merits of a properly executed economic and monetary union. It has pros and cons as an basic economics textbook will point out. There is genuine debate as to whether Europe represents an "optimum currency area" and that is an interesting essay topic in its own right. But, as for supporting a flawed economic construct, then no it doesn't fit my view nor that of an increasing number of people across Europe. In that context, the Dutch case is perhaps the most important development of all and far more telling than France.

Juan,

"Everything else fits in".

Yes, I suspect that it's on front national's agenda to exterminate jews, the disabled, jehovas witnesses, start up a breeding programme of aryans in norway, invade poland, create more lebensraum and build loads of ROADS so the tanks can move around.

To describe Front National as nazis is to downplay what the German Nazi party did and stood for. Front National are not nazis. To argue that is apart from being intellectually dishonest, just plain ignorant and stupid.

Teamhurtmore - stop preaching at me. You are the one who could do with learning some lessons about honesty in debate

You clearly hate the EU and the Euro. You have (wrongly) been predicting Armageddon for many months. It has not come to pass. Your interpretation of what has happened in the Netherlands is distinctly odd to say the least.

The Euro and the common fiscal policy that goes with it has already failed

It's allowed countries to become severely uncompetitive against fellow Euro nations and taken away any means for members to 'adjust' their competitiveness

That's a failure

Teamhurtmore: I couldn't agree more on your view of the Euro, but I would go so far as to say a fiscal or monetary union can never work.

Juan: with regards to decoupling from the Euro and going back to a country's old currency, or new currency, is very much something that Greece for instance, would benefit from. Germany is enjoying the fruits of having a "cheap" currency in so much as they export lots of fancy stuff like cars whereas Greece with heavy reliance on its tourism. Then again maybe you were saying just that with

"Since the euros people's buying power as gone down, so I propose we go back to the Franc". Because right now in the middle of a global economic crisis, going back to the old money and just devaluate it is quite a good idea.

TJ - you are doing it again, please stop it (ie making flawed assumptions about my beliefs). Happy to debate facts but will simply ignore personal, ill-informed attacks. Correctly the mods dont like it, so best stop now please.

I disagree with the current structure of the ERM on basic economic grounds - it is based on flawed foundations and dishonest politics. That does not make me anti the European Union (different thing altogether but actually on balance something I support) nor anti the concept of a single currency (if structured correctly). Having said that, if pushed to a conclusion I would argue that on basic economic grounds the EU has probably become too large to be create an "optimum currency area'' successfully but the argument is not clear cut.

Happy to quote what I wrote on here 6 months ago - three broad scenarios (no not Armageddon thank you) of which the one that I thought most likely is playing out almost exactly. But never let fact get in the way of a good argument, hey?

Read today's FT for the basic facts on the Netherlands, it IS very signficant. Anyway work to do now.

Teamhurtmore - why don't you actually show some intellectual honesty? all I have to go on is your postings on here as you hide your identity and background

your postings show a deep dislike of the EU and a long series of predictions none of which come true. You post I question here does this again.

I have already read up on what has happened in the Netherlands. A neo fascist minor coalition partner with unashamedly populist policies has refused to sign up to an austerity budget and brought the governemnt down. This coalition was beset with tensions and was never going to last anyway.

Oh - and please stop preaching at me.

A neo fascist minor coalition partner with unashamedly populist policies has refused to sign up to an austerity budget and brought the governemnt down.

So, a 'right wing' party refuses to sign up to a 'right wing' economic policy - back to that dichotomy thing again, aren't we?

There is noting to worry about. The French 'socialist' PM will do exactly the same as Sarko, the Dutch will put together another coalition, and those who planned this little market wobble will clean up on the dead cat bounce.

but Spain... now that's a whole new can of worms...

Hahahaha! politics again eh?

Politics don't mean jack shit, if you aint got no money you can't make any changes happen, who is it that has all of the money?

Aah yes the rich and powerful and they're too busy buying massive houses, cars and gem stones to give a shit about the future of our race.

No money = No change, regardless of the puppets and the show they put on, savve!

Yes, I suspect that it's on front national's agenda to exterminate jews, the disabled, jehovas witnesses, start up a breeding programme of aryans in norway, invade poland, create more lebensraum and build loads of ROADS so the tanks can move around.

To describe Front National as nazis is to downplay what the German Nazi party did and stood for. Front National are not nazis. To argue that is apart from being intellectually dishonest, just plain ignorant and stupid.

So the Nazis only became "Nazis" when they came to power ? For all that period before the set about to exterminate jews, the disabled, jehovas witnesses, start up a breeding programme of aryans in norway, invade poland, create more lebensraum and build loads of ROADS so the tanks can move around, they they [u]weren't[/u] Nazis at all ? ....... they were something completely different ? So tell me swedishmatt, what exactly were they then ?

Of course if the FN were ever to achieve power in France they wouldn't do any of the above, quite simply because they "couldn't" - whether or not they wanted to. But no other credible party in France is more like the Nazis than the FN - their ideology is based on hate, lies, and scapegoats.

I'll remind you that Marine Le Pen's father, the first leader of the FN, is infamous for having dismissed the Holocaust as merely "a detail of history". And describing the Nazi occupation of France as "not especially inhumane", something which he received a suspended prison sentence for. It's hard to imagine anyone who would have more enthusiastically supported and collaborated with the Nazis than the founding leader of the FN.

For obvious reasons the current leader of the FN has tried, with some success, to distance herself from the sickening Nazi sympathies of her father. And having realised that the FN has now reached saturation point in respect to how many racists there are in France willing to vote for them, has now expanded the rhetoric to attacking, bankers, capitalism, etc. A classic opportunistic strategy of fascists both historically and globally.

So I have predicted Armageddon, made a long series of predictions, none of which has come true and have been intellectually (and otherwise) dishonest......lets see...so 4 months ago on here I said:

teamhurtmore - Member
allthepies - Member
THM - how do you think the end game will play out ?
[b]I have no idea, but its nice to speculate. I guess three scenarios:[/b]

1. Euro crisis before end 1Q12 (25% chance): including [b]sov defaults[/b] (Greece, Italy...?), banking failures/nationalisation, [b]deep social unrest[/b], deep and extended recession
2.[b] Europe muddles thru [/b](65% chance), [b]sustained period of very low/negative growth, social unrest, [/b]democratic pressure for orderly restructuring of € zone, introduction of different currency blocs (2 or none at all) - within this 70% chance this is disorderly, 30% orderly
3. Europe recovers and prospers in current form (10% chance)

Not "exactly" Armageddon is it (75% chance this doesn't occur). And in the murky and very inexact world of trying to predict the economic future, not a bad effort and better than pro's like Nouriel Roubin and George Magnus I believe!

[b]The big unknown is the social impact in all this. [/b]There is an almost irreconcilable gulf between the politics and the economics of the € zone with the politicians lacking the insight/foresight and ability to credibly get ahead of the financial markets and the rapidly deteriorating economies (look what is happening this week in Greece and Italy). [b]The losers are the public and the big question is at what point do they crack and demand change. The potential for revolt among the European middle classes will be a key factor. Tensions will continue to grow between national and pooled sovereignty (with the latter being the ultimate loser)[/b]

Gosh, that is wildly inaccurate, isn't it?!?

Ok then the really speculative bit:

There will be an over-reaction to the excesses of the past 10-15 years - [b]the main losers in the Uk will be the public sector and financial services being the main losers - aggressive cuts (deficit reduction) and over-regulation and state interference (banker bashing).[/b] The financial system will continue to [b]malfunction [/b]weighed down by over-regulation, the toxic legacy of asset quality, and inability to grow out of the crisis. C[b]redit starvation will condemn the real economy to a sustained period of low growth.[/b] Government participation in economic life will increase in the misguided view that this was simply a failure of capitalism (while emerging economies will continue to adopt capitalism and accelerate further ahead leaving Eur in their wake). The Austrian School (Hayek and friends) will make a come back in the field of economics after lag. [b]Hopefully this will not be accompanied with excess nationalism (but economic nationalism will be inevitable - tariffs, protectionism etc)
[/b]
POSTED 4 MONTHS AGO #

Hmmmmm.....Never let the truth get in the way of a good argument!

Yup. Wildly inaccurate speculation would seem to sum it up along with grossly biased analysis and pejorative language showing your biasses

And having realised that the FN has now reached saturation point in respect to how many racists there are in France willing to vote for them, has now expanded the rhetoric to attacking, bankers, capitalism, etc. A classic opportunistic strategy of fascists both historically and globally.

Indeed.

TandemJeremy - Member
Yup. Wildly inaccurate speculation would seem to sum it up along with grossly biased analysis and pejorative language showing your biasses

100% - couldn't be further from what happened.

Teamhurtmore

YOu need to understand that what you consider axiomatic and an established fact is not so when you come from a different direction
I know its useless to attempt to debate with you but this illustrats it perfectly

The financial system will continue to malfunction weighed down by over-regulation,

So you take it as axiomatic that "over regulation" of the financial system will cause it to malfunction - whilst ignoring that( from a different viewpoint) lack of regulation is what caused the massive crisis in the first place and that actually little effective regulation is in place.

When you reason from false premise as you do in this instance you arrive at false results

What you are seemingly unable to do is either examine your starting point or indeed recognise it for what it is - a product of a very rightwing neoliberal economic doctrine.

Yup. Wildly inaccurate speculation would seem to sum it up along with grossly biased analysis and pejorative language showing your biasses

Can we remind you of this argument in 24 hours when you're discussing the growth figures 😉

YOu need to understand that what you consider axiomatic and an established fact is not so when you come from a different direction

Like your conviction that the Nazi's were 'right wing' despite the evidence that their economic policies were anything but 😐

TandemJeremy - Member
Teamhurtmore

The financial system will continue to malfunction weighed down by over-regulation,
So you take it as axiomatic that "over regulation" of the financial system will cause it to malfunction - whilst ignoring that( from a different viewpoint) lack of regulation is what caused the massive crisis in the first place and that actually little effective regulation is in place.

Excellent TJ - the perfect quote to illustrate your style of arguments. First the neat selective editing, why stop there, why not include the whole sentance/context. Second, the basic mis-understanding. I said "over" regulation not "excess". That is the point. The history of financial liberalisation and regulation tells us that you do not accelerate change (increased regulation or increased liberalisation) when banks are in an unhealthy state. The new regulations are absolutely necessary (albeit conflicting in some details) but the timetable is overly excessive if you need banks to start supplying credit - surely the point of QE??? Balancing the process of de-leveraging is very difficult (go and read the recent IMF Global Stability Report published last week for proof). Time will tell - but watch the regulators agree with me and relax the timetable of reform introduction. 2012 should see greater levels of capital for banks coming into force - odds on this being out back to 2013?? Why because sometimes necessary reforms need to be delayed in order to achieve a different more pressing objective ie, getting credit into the economy to stimulate growth.

(ps, where have I argued that there was insufficient regulation. Again on the contrary, when people have argued that the crisis was 100% the fault of bankers, I have countered that others including regulators must shoulder the blame. Inconvenient truth I know!)

a meta political argument. politics is multi axis. obviously

Nanny state ... 🙄

Ernie: so because the nazis weren't full on nazis until they got into power, it means FN are also nazis because they're not in power yet. You are generous with the nazi label. Everyone is a nazi.

Ernie sorry i got you confused with tj, he's the one calling evertyone a nazi.

What you are seemingly unable to do is either examine your starting point or indeed recognise it for what it is - a product of a very rightwing neoliberal economic doctrine.

So let's examine this "product of a very rightwing neoliberal (sorry Steve Keen, I have been trying!) economic doctrine" and the fit with the idea that the euro zone is not an optimal currency area.

Let's try a Harvard Professor such as Ken Rogoff who argues:

Nevertheless, as pollution, financial instability, health problems, and inequality continue to grow, and as political systems remain paralyzed, capitalism’s future might not seem so secure in a few decades as it seems now.

ie, well-known examples of market failure, with his conclusion in yesterday's FT that:

The real lesson of the euro’s grand experiment is that, given the weak state of global governance, the optimal single currency area is probably still a country, at least when two or more large countries are involved.

So perfectly plausible to recognise the weaknesses of the market as an allocator of scarce resources while arguing that the euro may not be an optimal currency area. QED.

TandemJeremy - Member

Teamhurtmore
I know its useless to attempt to debate with you but this illustrates it perfectly

And indeed it does as does the rest of your posting.

Laughable in its lack or rigour and its intellectual dishonesty.

swedishmatt - Member

Ernie sorry i got you confused with tj, he's the one calling evertyone a nazi.

Only those who follow a nazi ideology such as the FN and BNP

TandemJeremy

Laughable in its lack or rigour and its intellectual dishonesty.

TJ are you trying to outdo Dear Leader with your complicated reasoning?

Do you want to implement collective farming?

🙄

No he's just trying to keep it nice 'n personal despite polite requests not to? 😕

follow a nazi ideology

How many and which elements of the 25 point programme does an organisation have to follow to constitute a Nazi ideology? Can you pick and choose or do you need to fulfil all the aspects, like nationalisation of public services?

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/nsdappro.asp

Being an ignorant, dishonest person I felt I ought to try and read something tonight to improve my ways. So I tried the FT and three articles:

The Editorial

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/89870132-8e1d-11e1-bf8f-00144feab49a.html#axzz1srUpNsyx

'The Dutch case is a horrific case of Europe's self harm.'

'Another core country going soft on the eurozone's chosen strategy'

Commentary

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/035c1b2e-8d37-11e1-8b49-00144feab49a.html#axzz1srUpNsyx

'A particularly important aspect of those risks is of further deleveraging by the banks....economically dangerous'

.....'exposed weaknesses of the actual design of the eurozone'

Nightmare, I was looking to see where I was going so badly wrong. Is there no-one out there who can talk sense!?! 😉

swedishmatt - Member

Ernie: so because the nazis weren't full on nazis until they got into power.....

😕 eh ?

Weren't full on Nazis ? What were they then ...... fifty percent Nazis ?

What did they call themselves when they were in opposition......the Half Nazi Party ?

I don't what you have a degree in swedishmatt but I trust it wasn't history or politics ?

.........Nazi Party 1919-1933, "not full on Nazis" [i]ffs[/i] 😕

Ernie: i was trying to make sense of what you wrote. That's not what i think.

Ernie: i was trying to make sense of what you wrote.

Well it wasn't exactly complicated, ie, contrary to your claim, it isn't necessary to to exterminate jews, the disabled, jehovas witnesses, start up a breeding programme of aryans in norway, invade poland, create more lebensraum and build loads of ROADS so the tanks can move around, before you can describe a party as "Nazi", which is very clearly what you suggested. The Nazis were definitely Nazi before they did all those things.

Of course as Juan correctly points out, technically, the Nazis were a German political party. But that doesn't take away the fact that many non-German modern neo-Nazi organisations, share at the heart of their ideology, that central tenet which is vital and universal to all these far right parties - hate, lies, and blame on a minority which is used as a scapegoat.

This thread is just another little ray of sunshine......well done everyone.

This thread is just another little ray of sunshine......well done everyone.

Has Godwin been invoked yet?

Has Godwin been invoked yet?

No, I don't think anyone has actually been called a Nazi apart from Nazis

so it's all OK at the moment

teethgrinder - Member

Has Godwin been invoked yet?

Have you read the thread? 😆 zulu trolled the thread that way on the first page. (without managing to mention the 'N' word first.)

I skimmed through it, but my eyes kept glazing over and I was repeatedly struck with deja vu.

Ernie: " that central tenet which is vital and universal to all these far right parties - hate, lies, and blame on a minority which is used as a scapegoat."

What you are describing is a typical nationalistic populistic party. So according to your definition, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria - are also nazis. Just to name a few. I think that would be quite hillarious.

I will stop arguing in this thread, I don't think anyone actually gets what I'm saying. Not surprising really given the Uk education system, or lack of 🙂

Not surprising really given the Uk education system, or lack of

Ooooh, smooth. You'll go far. 😛

Well apart from the proof in this thread, I remember at Newcastle Uni when one of my fellow students piped up "Who was Stalin?" when we were watching a video on the 1980-90s decline of the Soviet Union.

Supposedly an educated person. UK - excellent education system. Quite a few of them in this thread too.

"Nazis?" Yes! EVERYONE IS A NAZI.

Disgraceful.

You went to Newcastle uni AND state that the UK education system is rubbish?
Good to see that you recognise that your degree is shit.

Ooooh, get you!

Answering what you see as a generalisation with another generalisation (based on an internet discussion forum thread and a daft bloke you once met) is hardly top class debating is it?

No I only studied at Newcastle Uni for 6 months. Main degree from a Swedish university. Have you studied abroad? No? Come back when you have.

Julianwilson: Sorry, do you want me to post some statistics as to why the UK education system is horrendous? Why A-levels are crap? I don't really have to - go google it.

So a Swedish uni taught you that the only Nazis ever were the German Nazi party and then only once they got into power.

Funny how all these groups that follow a nazi ideaology are not nazis.

Funny how all these groups that follow a nazi ideaology are not nazis.

I've already asked you how many and which elements of the 25 point programme does an organisation have to follow to constitute a Nazi ideology?

TJ:

So a Swedish uni taught you that the only Nazis ever were the German Nazi party and then only once they got into power.

Just because a political party is a nationalistic populistic party doesn't mean it's a nazi party. I know this is a difficult concept for you.

No I only studied at Newcastle Uni for 6 months. Main degree from a Swedish university. Have you studied abroad? No? Come back when you have.

SwedishMatt: oooh, the possibility of some statistics and suggestion of google. You're up to 3/10 now.

Advice: stop posting in a thread by all means. Announce you are fed up with it by all means. But leaving with a criticism of a whole education system as your last sentence is either trolling, or a big sign that you don't really want to leave the thread at all.

SwedishMatt, do you know the range of educational backgrounds (and I am talking 'eras', academic levels and indeed countries here 😉 ) of the posters on this thread?

zulu, the FN do pretty well on those 25 points. About 12 more than any other major politial force either side of the channel as far as I can see. 'Nazi' has for me lost its meaning a little because of its overuse in non-political ways. I think the real issue with the FN being socialist/left wing or not is that of citizenship. A socialist with no other agendas will define citizenship in rather different terms to a National Socialist, FN or indeed BNP. In fact despite only one the word difference in their names, I don't see the SNP legislating against the opportunities and chances of English and Irish people in the way that the BNP would do for supposedly 'non-brits', same goes for plaid cymru of course. It is a valid argument that the left-leaning elements (as distinct from the interventionist ones if we are talking two axes which of course we should be) of the FN policy are there first and foremost to win the votes of disaffected white french people, and a vehicle to power rather than where their values and wishes lie.

I am leaving the thread to go to work now btw. Happy arguing 😀 .

Sweedish matt - you are simply wrong I am afraid. the FN are nazis, the BNP are nazis. they take their inspiration directly from the German Nazis and they espouse a nazi philosophy.

Teej.....please cut it out.

I will stop arguing in this thread, I don't think anyone actually gets what I'm saying. Not surprising really given the Uk education system, or lack of

I can't believe anyone had the nerve to post that 🙂

A little while back I actually began to feel a bit sorry for you assuming that you were probably quite young with your 'don't argue with me I went to university' attitude. I now think you probably deserve some stick for your ridiculous arrogance. A ridiculous arrogance which is all the misplaced by the fact that you come out absurd and naive comments, such as the suggestion the Nazis weren't really proper Nazis until after 1933. What exactly did you study at university ?

And btw since I know this information is important to you, I didn't go university (not even one of those crappy UK universities), I have no degree of any description, I don't even have any A levels, although I do have several CSEs. So please feel free in the future if you disagree with any comment I've made, to point out that you must be right because you went to university (a proper foreign one). It will save you the trouble of having to construct a coherent and well thought out argument - something which you clearly struggle to achieve.