Elections in various countries

[xxx]

Umm the people of France didn't want the far-right to come to power in France.

a choice of elimination is not quite a choice of adhesion, it's hard to build a democratic policy on it...
that was Macron tactics to keep himself in charge...

Ah yes, the old story… ‘I have no problems with religion, all I ask is for no-one to look or behave differently’. Right.

right, in France, religion remain a private matter, that's what we call laïcité, religion has no place in politics...
you can be a Jedi in Paris as long as you don't take your saber out in the street...

[Ares Land]

I dont know about you, but I think this time at least people in France can be proud of their values and we are setting an exemple for others to follow!

As for the RN, two thirds of the voters would rather have people with views they entirely disagree with, or even no government at all rather than have them in charge.

I know the RN'd rather think this is some dark conspiracy. But I don't know. when two people out of three make that kind of effort to tell you your ideas suck, well, maybe your ideas suck.

[bradrn]

Ah yes, the old story… ‘I have no problems with religion, all I ask is for no-one to look or behave differently’. Right.

right, in France, religion remain a private matter, that's what we call laïcité, religion has no place in politics...
you can be a Jedi in Paris as long as you don't take your saber out in the street...

Quite astonishing. You’re not even attempting to deny it.

The attempt at an analogy beggars belief, too. The vast majority of religious symbols are not dangerous weapons. How could it possibly put people in danger if a Jew wears a kippah, or a Muslim a hijab? It’s one thing to keep religion out of politics, but quite another to force everyone in public life to act like Christians.

(For reference, I don’t personally wear a kippah. But that’s my choice. It shouldn’t be forced on me.)

[Torco]

Whoa whoa, xxx, nooooooo!

Look, you can have this or that position on the reasonableness of visibly wearing weird clothes all you want, but we're talking about laws under burgeois democracy here, not abstract principle. so what are the actual outcomes being promoted with these laws? it is nothing more than setting the police onto muslims and sikhs for very little reason. whatever one thinks about the hijab, and I don't love it tbh, that is a great harm indeed you're unleashing unto these people. consider that for the most part muslims and sikhs are not white, and we know how coppers treat nonwhites, don't we?

so what are we, snitches here? feds? afd? you don't set coppers loose onto peaceful people for their religious beliefs.

[xxx]

welcome to France,
the country where newspapers are allowed to blaspheme Jesus Christ, the prophet Mohammed, Moses,
and where you are obliged as a child to remove your cross, veil or kippa in the school of the republic,
or if you want to enter the service of the state...

[Travis B.]

Umm the people of France didn't want the far-right to come to power in France.

a choice of elimination is not quite a choice of adhesion, it's hard to build a democratic policy on it...
that was Macron tactics to keep himself in charge...

If a majority of French people wanted the RN to come to power, they could have voted for them. They didn't. So clearly a majority of the French people who voted clearly didn't want the RN to come to power.

Ah yes, the old story… ‘I have no problems with religion, all I ask is for no-one to look or behave differently’. Right.

right, in France, religion remain a private matter, that's what we call laïcité, religion has no place in politics...
you can be a Jedi in Paris as long as you don't take your saber out in the street...

Sure... yes, at one time laïcité was aimed at the power of the Catholic church, but now it is merely an excuse to harass people of color.

[xxx]

I don't think skin color has ever been an issue in France...

but yes, laïcité tends to repel religions, whatever they may be,
into the private sphere...
here, religions that spill over into the public sphere are very poorly managed...

the ideal of assimilation is in the same vein,
and ethnic outfits are seen as ideological opposition,

as much as this universalism allowed the conquest of the revolutionary ideals of enlightenment then colonization,
as much in the opposite direction, it is the panic on board, and contradictory injunctions...

[bradrn]

welcome to France,
the country where newspapers are allowed to blaspheme Jesus Christ, the prophet Mohammed, Moses,
and where you are obliged as a child to remove your cross, veil or kippa in the school of the republic,
or if you want to enter the service of the state...

This is what I most dislike about the modern French conception of laïcité: how it tries to justify discrimination by conflating it with liberalism. It’s one thing to let people express themselves in writing however they want, even if it’s offensive. But this is very different to forcing people to hide their religion in public. In fact it’s almost precisely the opposite — the former is about giving people the freedom to say what they want, whereas the latter restricts their freedom to practice their religion.

Also, a little note on that phrasing of ‘cross, veil or kippa’. I see this often enough from the French right-wing, presumably to make the impact of this law seem equal across all religions. But of course we know that this is rubbish: it disproportionally impacts Jews and Muslims, while having minimal effects on Christians.

[xxx]

Also, a little note on that phrasing of ‘cross, veil or kippa’. I see this often enough from the French right-wing, presumably to make the impact of this law seem equal across all religions. But of course we know that this is rubbish: it disproportionally impacts Jews and Muslims, while having minimal effects on Christians.

This is typically left-wing hypocrisy, the rightwing assumes Christian history,
but Christians, and Jews, and Muslims, have for the most part internalized this "obligation" of discretion...
even if it is easier for Christians, many of whom have lost all religion...

[Travis B.]

welcome to France,
the country where newspapers are allowed to blaspheme Jesus Christ, the prophet Mohammed, Moses,
and where you are obliged as a child to remove your cross, veil or kippa in the school of the republic,
or if you want to enter the service of the state...

This is what I most dislike about the modern French conception of laïcité: how it tries to justify discrimination by conflating it with liberalism. It’s one thing to let people express themselves in writing however they want, even if it’s offensive. But this is very different to forcing people to hide their religion in public. In fact it’s almost precisely the opposite — the former is about giving people the freedom to say what they want, whereas the latter restricts their freedom to practice their religion.

Also, a little note on that phrasing of ‘cross, veil or kippa’. I see this often enough from the French right-wing, presumably to make the impact of this law seem equal across all religions. But of course we know that this is rubbish: it disproportionally impacts Jews and Muslims, while having minimal effects on Christians.

Agreed completely.

[bradrn]

Also, a little note on that phrasing of ‘cross, veil or kippa’. I see this often enough from the French right-wing, presumably to make the impact of this law seem equal across all religions. But of course we know that this is rubbish: it disproportionally impacts Jews and Muslims, while having minimal effects on Christians.

This is typically left-wing hypocrisy, the rightwing assumes Christian history,
but Christians, and Jews, and Muslims, have for the most part internalized this "obligation" of discretion...
even if it is easier for Christians, many of whom have lost all religion...

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean, but it certainly sounds like you’re saying that observant Jews (and Muslims) have no place in France. I hope I’m wrong.

[xxx]

no one has anything to say about anyone's private life...
but, as far as social life is concerned, it is customary for everyone to be neutral...

this has never been a problem for any religion,
until the deplorable management of the migratory crisis,
where Islamists have recruited,
but also the criminality linked to drug trafficking...

and if observant Jews are currently tending to flee France and certain neighborhoods,
it's not because of the republic, but perhaps to its neglect,
and many have publicly called for a RN vote, which is abnormal in France...

by the way, Mélanchon is disapproved of by many French people for having broken the taboo of community voting,
not because of racism or Islamophobia but out of non-observance of French customs of religious neutrality...

A lot of RN votes respond to these attacks on customs
that are unwritten but felt to be constitutive of Frenchness...

[masako]

this has never been a problem for any religion,
until the deplorable management of the migratory crisis,
where Islamists have recruited,
but also the criminality linked to drug trafficking...

and if observant Jews are currently tending to flee France and certain neighborhoods,
it's not because of the republic, but perhaps to its neglect,
and many have publicly called for a RN vote, which is abnormal in France...

It's almost as if you think racism is ok, or something.

[xxx]

I don't think there's any racial issue here,
(I do not believe in the concept of race...)

just public incompetence,
that hasn't acted upstream to avoid a pile-up of social problems,
leading to social insecurity and extremist voting...

saying "it's not right to vote extremist" isn't going to fix things...

[masako]

I don't think there's any racial issue here,
(I do not believe in the concept of race...)

Perhaps 'bigotry' would be a more fitting description.

[bradrn]

this has never been a problem for any religion,
until the deplorable management of the migratory crisis

I can assure you it has been a problem, it’s just that it could be swept under the rug because people felt OK with ignoring the Jewish and Muslim minorities. Now, that’s no longer acceptable.

Also, as far as I’m aware, it’s only recently that ‘ban all public religious expression’ has become a mainstream opinion. There may have been a time when laïcité was just a matter of keeping religion out of politics — but now, it’s become something far more extreme and dangerous.

[xxx]

Perhaps 'bigotry' would be a more fitting description.

not even that,
I think it's above all social and cultural...
there's a certain attachment to a common destiny carried by a common culture,
which constitutes a nation, much more than a people...

tomorrow all French people would be black
wouldn't change a thing
if they carried the values, the culture and the customs
that make up Frenchness...

I can assure you it has been a problem, it’s just that it could be swept under the rug because people felt OK with ignoring the Jewish and Muslim minorities. Now, that’s no longer acceptable.
Also, as far as I’m aware, it’s only recently that ‘ban all public religious expression’ has become a mainstream opinion. There may have been a time when laïcité was just a matter of keeping religion out of politics — but now, it’s become something far more extreme and dangerous.

that's not true, eminent and responsible politicians have been of different religions, but not minorities,
since in France the concept of minority and community is a recent "invention",
the custom of discretion in this matter meant that they were not known or referenced as such...

[masako]

Perhaps 'bigotry' would be a more fitting description.

not even that,
I think it's above all social and cultural...
there's a certain attachment to a common destiny carried by a common culture,
which constitutes a nation, much more than a people...

tomorrow all French people would be black
wouldn't change a thing
if they carried the values, the culture and the customs
that make up Frenchness...

So you're a nationalist with a hint of prejudice. There have been Muslims in France before France was French. But you keep believing whatever makes you comfortable.

[xxx]

in our European countries,
history is long,
and some date it back
to before the birth of Mohammed...

[bradrn]

I can assure you it has been a problem, it’s just that it could be swept under the rug because people felt OK with ignoring the Jewish and Muslim minorities. Now, that’s no longer acceptable.
Also, as far as I’m aware, it’s only recently that ‘ban all public religious expression’ has become a mainstream opinion. There may have been a time when laïcité was just a matter of keeping religion out of politics — but now, it’s become something far more extreme and dangerous.

that's not true, eminent and responsible politicians have been of different religions, but not minorities,
since in France the concept of minority and community is a recent "invention",
the custom of discretion in this matter meant that they were not known or referenced as such...

In other words: minorities don’t exist, everyone is the same, and it’s impolite to say or act otherwise. So glad we’ve got that cleared up.

Myself, I think I’ll be leaving this conversation, because clearly you’ve made up your mind on this.