"Gilets jaunes" protests in France.

[Knight of Heaven]

Macron is a fake conservative. He acts like a generic left-leaning neoliberal, the labels he uses for himself are largely irrelevant.

He isn't a conservative ( never seen it that way). He is a Right Wing Social democrat, very Pro EU. He might be a neoliberal, but laissez faire ideology has little to do with left leaning tendencies.

De-jure his "wife" was, in fact, a pedophile.
Having said that, the above-mentioned Schiappa law, which effectively makes pedophilia semi-legal, is the main factor here.

A law that was passed in 2018 how it is a factor when Macron was a teenager way back in the early 90s?

After reading about it, the Schiappa law doesn't make pedophilia semi ilegal, on the contrary, that is your perverse interpretation, what a it does, is raises concerns that the new law will push judges to classify cases of abuse as sexual assault rather than rape if "surprise and coercion" cannot be proved. In fact Schiappa bill tightens the laws, and impose fines for street harassment and make it easier for sex with a child under 15 to be classified as rape. So i dont see how it makes pedophilia legal.
And also Pushes age of consent to 15 years old.

In my country for example is still 14 so you know.

You can argue if it is enough or not, if it does something or not.... i still fail to see how this is relevant to the case of Macron and His Wife, in particular. Back in 1994 or 95 Macron was 16 or 17, when she was his high school teacher. We are not talking about elementary school here, with 11 or 12 year olds.... It is dumb claim to paint her as a pedophile. And people only do it, because it is convenient.

You do realize it affects like everyone right? Fuel tax affects people who own cars, use public transit, etc. French people had every reason to react like that.

It affects lots of people im sure, mainly people using diesel cars. Not sure they have the right to react the way they have been reacting though. Killing, and burning property, it is not a right.
It is mainly an issue of the rich or the high middle class. The problem this is serving as trigger to other areas of discontentment.

[Heathen Hammer]

He isn't a conservative ( never seen it that way). He is a Right Wing Social democrat, very Pro EU. He might be a neoliberal, but laissez faire ideology has little to do with left leaning tendencies.

Raising taxes is incompatible with laissez faire ideology. No wonder that French had buyer remorse almost immedeately folowing the election.

A law that was passed in 2018 how it is a factor when Macron was a teenager way back in the early 90s?

Well that law is the reason why he is associated with pedo lobby.

It affects lots of people im sure, mainly people using diesel cars. Not sure they have the right to react the way they have been reacting though. Killing, and burning property, it is not a right.
It is mainly an issue of the rich or the high middle class. The problem this is serving as trigger to other areas of discontentment.

If you threaten livelihood of people (some jobs depend on driving, transportation, etc.) then these people had every right to riot. The EU "let them eat cake" mentality is also not helping.

[Copperknickers II]

It feels like protesting is a national sport of France. Ok there are reasons, but were they enough to fuel that much of a violence? It kinda looks like many of these people are out there simply because "why not".

It's a well-known phenomenon that once civic disorder reaches a critical mass, idiots figure that the police can't arrest everyone and so they are free to loot and burn stuff with impunity (not that it always works out that way, there have been hundreds of arrests). It's also well-known that riots in France are not really seen as a big deal, they are too common. Nevertheless we shouldn't understate the scale of this protest movement, it has spread to other countries and it is by some measures the worst rioting that France has seen for many decades. The rioting will eventually burn itself out and Macron is in no political danger for now, but there may be reasons to be worried come the next election cycle.

France opted for full political reset in electing En Marche to power ahead of the traditional mainstream parties. That experiment has arguably not turned out too well (although some say French people will feel the improvements by the time the next election comes around). So the question is, do people now go back to the mainstream options which caused the problems that led to Macron's election in the first place? Or to the other non-mainstream option, Marine Le Pen? Or to a state of fractious political fragmentation that paralyses and weakens the French state, and thus Europe as a whole, at a critical time? The outlook for the future is not looking all too good.

Ummmm yes? He is a leftist? The guy is a textbook authoritarian leftist. He’s cut from the exact same cloth that the other globalist like the brexit “do over vote” are. It’s disgusting.

Authoritarian leftist? He seems to me to be a textbook centre rightist. Pro-big business, lightly nationalist (albeit EU-focused rather than strictly French focused), with a few token 'liberal' policies which in practice actually affect the poor and help the rich. He wants to present himself as a liberal, and he does have a cosmopolitan globalist worldview which separates him from true right wingers, but ultimately he's a rightist masquerading very, very poorly as a liberal. He despises ordinary people and he dislikes non-white people and he sometimes lets it show. He is pro-immigration purely for its benefits to business.

[JP226]

Authoritarian leftist? He seems to me to be a textbook centre rightist. Pro-big business, lightly nationalist (albeit EU-focused rather than strictly French focused), with a few token 'liberal' policies which in practice actually affect the poor and help the rich. He wants to present himself as a liberal, and he does have a cosmopolitan globalist worldview which separates him from true right wingers, but ultimately he's a rightist masquerading very, very poorly as a liberal. He despises ordinary people and he dislikes non-white people and he sometimes lets it show. He is pro-immigration purely for its benefits to business.

Lol, no. You guys yourself are so far left you can't see anyone a quarter step from Marx as left leaning. The fellow is clearly an authoritarian leftist. Works for the aristocracy, authoritarian, wants to curb speech, big government, corporate welfare, etc etc etc. Hallmarks of the covetous leftist.

[Diocle]

.. At least he is been faithful to his wife, ..

Are you sure? .. and then what's about Mathieu and .. Alexandre?

.. .. .. poor man, with such a wife!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[alhoon]

I think you mean ephebophilia and not pedophilia. The age of consent in France is at 15 years old, so, from a legal perspective, there is nothing reprehensible about Macron's love life, even if they both lied about when they had sex.

I didn't say it's illegal. I said it shows a lot about his character and how foolish he is in picking partners. I don't think that a 41 years old married man or woman that gets in bed with a 15 17 years old is a good life partner. For laws, perhaps that she was his teacher is against some law, but that is not my concern. I don't think what Macron did is illegal. I believe he married a wacko.
As for laws? If that woman was in a different country with a limit at 17, would it make Macron worse decision maker? No, it wouldn't.
I admit there were several 40-years old I wanted to #### when I was 15. I always liked older women.

However, now, I would realize that married cougars that are seduced by highschool students around the age of their kids are not good partners.

Had Macron met that woman, already divorced, when he was 23 and she was 48, I would have no problem with that. Had Macron chosen a married 27 years old teacher with kids when he was 15? I would be making the same complains.

lol at least he is not GAY, that would be terrible! Just think about it! THE END IS NIGH!

So a hetero guy who marry an older women is not fit for public office? What about gays? Actually, what sexual preferences are acceptable?

...or, You know, we should just stay out of his bedroom/love life/marriage because its nobody's business? 21th century, Europe etc...

A hetero guy marrying an older woman is perfectly fine. A guy that thinks a 41 years old woman that abandoned her family for her high school student is a good person, that is someone he should spend his life with? That is a guy with serious decision-making issues.
And such a guy cannot be trusted with a country.

What has that, ever to do with anything? btw that isn't pedophilia. Attraction to teenagers is called hebephilia i believe... And he is what in his late 30s? her is in her 50s or something? Who cares? At least he is been faithful to his wife, a thing the last two Presidents cant claim to have been.

I find the claims of pedophilia in this case to be just ridiculous, and dumb. And usually falling in the Ad hominem trap, instead of focusing on his failed politics. And Policy line, which isn't surprising... he is doing exactly what he said he would do, in the campaign.

I don't mind their age difference now. The 26 years is not the problem. The problem is that a mature, married mother dropped her family for her high school student. As I said above, if he met her when he was 23 and she was 49 and divorced, that would be fine and I wouldn't have a problem with it.

PS. I would have a problem with a 49 years old satyr marrying a 23 years old girl BTW. I never said I am unbiased.

Lol, no. You guys yourself are so far left you can't see anyone a quarter step from Marx as left leaning. The fellow is clearly an authoritarian leftist. Works for the aristocracy, authoritarian, wants to curb speech, big government, corporate welfare, etc etc etc. Hallmarks of the covetous leftist.

Nooope, he's center right. Being a globalist doesn't mean he's a leftwing, on the contrary.
Free Market is closer to globalism. Works for the aristocracy = rightwing. He doesn't want to curb free speech and he's not pro corporate welfare or big government.
He's just more pro welfare and less against big government than what you would like. However that doesn't make him leftwing, it makes him less rightwing than you.

[JP226]

Nooope, he's center right. Being a globalist doesn't mean he's a leftwing, on the contrary.
Free Market is closer to globalism. Works for the aristocracy = rightwing. He doesn't want to curb free speech and he's not pro corporate welfare or big government.
He's just more pro welfare and less against big government than what you would like. However that doesn't make him leftwing, it makes him less rightwing than you.[/LEFT]

Completely incorrect. Modern inception of globalism has nothing to do with free trade. It's about writing favorable trade agreements to layer on the benefits of cheap exploited labor and make sure the output in say a country full of brown people flows into the West and enrich the insidious corporate overlords found permeating liberal establishments across the west. Conservatism/ nationalism is about combating that idea and either instituting "barriers" to trade to prevent the benefits to the liberal masters OR... actually instituting free trade that would enrich the economy and not the select hands of a few liberals that happen to work for and with the democrat party or their Euro counterparts. Modern day liberalism == neo imperialism and exploitation.

[alhoon]

Completely incorrect. Modern inception of globalism has nothing to do with free trade. It's about writing favorable trade agreements to layer on the benefits of cheap exploited labor and make sure the output in say a country full of brown people flows into the West and enrich the insidious corporate overlords found permeating liberal establishments across the west. Conservatism/ nationalism is about combating that idea and either instituting "barriers" to trade to prevent the benefits to the liberal masters OR... actually instituting free trade that would enrich the economy and not the select hands of a few liberals that happen to work for and with the democrat party or their Euro counterparts. Modern day liberalism == neo imperialism and exploitation.

Free trade is not against (or pro) exploiting the poor. Generally, unlimited Free Trade means exploiting the poor without any oversight. Hence it is better to be center or center right than far right. Conservatism also has little to do with exploiting the poor. It's just that conservatives often exploit the poor because they are the rich. And the rich are conservatives because the status quo favors them.


Also Free trade in a society that has multi-trillion banks = the money go to the select hands of a few liberals... as in the classical liberalism. Pro-free trade. The rich don't want barriers to the trade nor oversight.

You cannot really have free trade when you have so rich businesses because they can kill the competition if they play without rules and institute monopolies.

PS. This is not USA. Liberal for the rest of the world doesn't mean progressive. Often it means people like Thatcher and Reagan. Neoliberals are globalists, pro free trade and small government. But that has the tiiiny problem that Free Trade is ruthless trade where the big fish eats the small fish. And there are some seriously large fish swimming there. That's why most multinationals are globalist and rightwing.

They are the big fish that want the government to go away so they can eat the small fish.

EDIT: Keep in mind that Macron resists increasing the taxes on the wealthy, something the Yellow Jackets demand. They also want more welfare

[cfmonkey45]

Because no one has actually provided any factual basis to the debates, here it goes. The Financial Times published an excellent article explaining how Macron's recent reforms have impacted the disposable income of French citizens.

France is currently one of the most highly taxed countries in the world, with taxation reaching about 46.2% of GDP, compared to Denmark at 46.0%, the OECD average of 34.2%, and the USA at 27.1% (this includes all levels of government). [Source]

France's Constitution has established the country as a heavily centralized state, with minimal Federalism. This means that most of the authority that local (rural) governments have is devolved. This has created a dynamic where virtually all of French politics is concentrated at the national level, which has led to a consolidation of power (and dissatisfaction) with the government in Paris. Contrast this with the United States (or Germany), where each individual state has explicitly guaranteed constitutional rights and power sharing agreements with the Federal Government.

Part of Macron's reforms were to initiate tax reform and broaden integration into the European Union. Tax reform in France is desperately needed, since high taxation rates to GDP are correlated with slower growth. Additionally, by broadening France's integration with the European Union, it will largely bolster future prospects of European and French economic growth and largely dampen the potential negative effects of a Brexit (of any kind). Due to widespread corruption scandals, Emmanuel Macron managed to coalesce a large, new coalition to attract disaffected voters to a new Centrist, Neoliberal coalition. This largely avoided the Populist effects seen in other countries (such as the US and UK) because of their multi-round electoral system.

Unfortunately for Macron, his coalition is dependent upon deals made in the French Senate. En Marche! controls a solid majority in the National Assembly, but only 6% of the Senate. Since Senators are elected indirectly by local legislatures and governments, En Marche! remains at a strong disadvantage, and it is required to make deals with other parties and Senators in government.

This required Macron to formulate his policies in response to the internal dynamics of the French legislature, rather than with the popular mandate he was given. Macron's fiscal reforms were to reduce distortionary taxes (particularly the wealth tax and corporate tax), and instead rebalance the tax reform to encourage economic investment. Additionally, he wanted to fulfill portions of the Paris Climate Agreement to include a Gas Tax as part of the Carbon Tax Scheme. While these effects were trivial at first glance, they expose significant flaws in France's political and economic system that requires more comprehensive changes.

[Gäiten]

Well, well. Remember behind bad old white men there are always worse older white women hidden.

[alhoon]

Part of Macron's reforms were to initiate tax reform and broaden integration into the European Union. Tax reform in France is desperately needed, since high taxation rates to GDP are correlated with slower growth. Additionally, by broadening France's integration with the European Union, it will largely bolster future prospects of European and French economic growth and largely dampen the potential negative effects of a Brexit (of any kind). Due to widespread corruption scandals, Emmanuel Macron managed to coalesce a large, new coalition to attract disaffected voters to a new Centrist, Neoliberal coalition. This largely avoided the Populist effects seen in other countries (such as the US and UK) because of their multi-round electoral system.

Unfortunately for Macron, his coalition is dependent upon deals made in the French Senate. En Marche! controls a solid majority in the National Assembly, but only 6% of the Senate. Since Senators are elected indirectly by local legislatures and governments, En Marche! remains at a strong disadvantage, and it is required to make deals with other parties and Senators in government.

This required Macron to formulate his policies in response to the internal dynamics of the French legislature, rather than with the popular mandate he was given. Macron's fiscal reforms were to reduce distortionary taxes (particularly the wealth tax and corporate tax), and instead rebalance the tax reform to encourage economic investment. Additionally, he wanted to fulfill portions of the Paris Climate Agreement to include a Gas Tax as part of the Carbon Tax Scheme. While these effects were trivial at first glance, they expose significant flaws in France's political and economic system that requires more comprehensive changes.

Good analysis + rep.
However, Macron bit far more than he could chew and ignoring the popular mandate that wanted the tax reform for whatever reason (and I think corruption scandals continue) led him to face the music.

I am certainly not sure that the majority of the French are globalists or just go with the Euro and if they are, there are many Euroskeptics. The Yellow Jackets may have started over the gas tax, but I don't think they are just one angry group. Many different groups and ideologies were fed up with the recent stagnation and Macron's failure led them to the streets.

[Mithradates]

It affects lots of people im sure, mainly people using diesel cars. Not sure they have the right to react the way they have been reacting though. Killing, and burning property, it is not a right.
It is mainly an issue of the rich or the high middle class. The problem this is serving as trigger to other areas of discontentment.

If you threaten livelihood of people (some jobs depend on driving, transportation, etc.) then these people had every right to riot. The EU "let them eat cake" mentality is also not helping.

This is not about just some people, and definitely not about the rich or the high middle class.
If you increase the price of the fuel you will indirectly increase the price of many other things too, for example You need to transport the wheat from the farms to the mills, than transport the flour to the bakeries, than transport the bread to the grocery stores = more expensive bread etc this would effect everybody, especially the poorer people.

[dogukan]

I really don't know why Europe created this stupid bumbling system. They didn't like it the first time the Germans tried it, nor the second time. And some reason because there aren't firearms involved and the Germans are asking nicely, Europe is ready to line up and come under them? It's just crazy, European leaders that are pro EU are in a round about way saying... if Hitler only asked nicely we could of had this system 80 year ago.

Its called economics (mainly, economies of scale and efficiency increases) and creating a system that makes war impossible. If you read some history, you'll find out that it had been the most succesful project humanity has ever launched carrying a destroyed Europe to become a global economic and cultural power house without destroying itself from stupid nationalist competition.

Seriously, the new generation has no idea what EU was made for or achieved. They take everything in it for granted.

Lol, no. You guys yourself are so far left you can't see anyone a quarter step from Marx as left leaning. The fellow is clearly an authoritarian leftist. Works for the aristocracy, authoritarian, wants to curb speech, big government, corporate welfare, etc etc etc. Hallmarks of the covetous leftist.

It really is happening. I am living in a world where neo-liberalism is dubbed as "leftism"...last I checked, the whole villification of neo-liberalism started with left in Latin America and became the buzzword for left for decades to refer to everything evil in the world. And now neo-liberals are left?

This is the opposite of what you say. The world went so far right that neo-liberalism is dubbed as "left".

Trust me there were more radical left in these protests than right.

[Love Mountain]

Macron is a fake conservative. He acts like a generic left-leaning neoliberal, the labels he uses for himself are largely irrelevant.

Really? Do tell me how.

You do realize it affects like everyone right? Fuel tax affects people who own cars, use public transit, etc. French people had every reason to react like that.

No they didn't. If they are so upset about regressive taxes, they should've been campaigning for decades to end VAT

De-jure his "wife" was, in fact, a pedophile.
Having said that, the above-mentioned Schiappa law, which effectively makes pedophilia semi-legal, is the main factor here.

I ed my girl when were both 16. I still think she was hot back then, am I a pedophile? What exactly is the line between when a person coerces someone into sex and when someone doesn't? As far as I'm concerned, if you're 16+ and you "consented" without any drugs or other coercion involved, it ain't rape or pedophilia. No matter how you wanna spin it.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Interesting that Trump cultists have a problem with Macron's wife being older than him, but don't mock about Melania being 24 years younger than the old lecher...

[Love Mountain]

Honestly the whole obsession with Macron's wife is overblown. As is the issue over Trump's wife. It's fun to point out that Trump was with her because of her looks, but everyone has their own personal vices. What matters is the ability and skill to do the job properly. I don't expect a President to live on some higher plane of existence or live the way I think people "should" live. I expect a President to be good at his job, and to be a normal, decent human being. If Trump was actually a good President, I wouldn't care how many women or hookers he paid. His business. Unfortunately, he's an incompetent nincompoop.

[Ludicus]

Join the two threads. It's the same subject, after all.#1 Created in December 1.

Btw, Macron's wife has nothing to do with the popular insurrection.

[alhoon]

It really is happening. I am living in a world where neo-liberalism is dubbed as "leftism"...last I checked, the whole villification of neo-liberalism started with left in Latin America and became the buzzword for left for decades to refer to everything evil in the world. And now neo-liberals are left?

This is the opposite of what you say. The world went so far right that neo-liberalism is dubbed as "left".

Trust me there were more radical left in these protests than right.

Take a deep breath! None of this is true. A single fellow in a game forum dubs neoliberals (clearly rightwing) as "left". The world hasn't got far right and neo-liberalism isn't called left.

Regardless: yes, communists, socialists, anarchists, radical leftwings etc are vehemently against neoliberalism.
But so are some far-right nationalists and many of the people that believe in the nation-state.

The extra divide of our time shapes to be Globalist vs Nationalist*, on top of Progressive vs Conservative and Left vs Right.

*Nationalist as in a person that believes in national identity and the nation-state, not necessarily the bad things associated with Fascists, Francoists, Nazis etc.

I ed my girl when were both 16. I still think she was hot back then, am I a pedophile? What exactly is the line between when a person coerces someone into sex and when someone doesn't? As far as I'm concerned, if you're 16+ and you "consented" without any drugs or other coercion involved, it ain't rape or pedophilia. No matter how you wanna spin it.

I can't properly answer that because of the ToS but let me just state that I consider very weird for someone to be attracted to a 16 years old girl if he's older than say 22-23. Even that would be pushing it, but I wouldn't be calling anyone names or avoiding them.

I didn't say Macron was raped and legally it's not paedophilia because 15 is the age of consent there. In many countries with age of consent at 17 or 18, that would be illegal.
I said I seriously question the judgement of a man that looks at an adulteress that was seduced by and married her highschool student and says "wow, that's a catch! This is a person I want beside me for life!". The man clearly and obviously has very low moral standards.
I dread to think what were his red lines when considering ministers. To give a more extreme example, but not by many orders of magnitude, I wouldn't trust the judgement of a man that said "This guy broke into two homes before he was arrested but was let go by a technicality. Certainly makes good friend material".
Or, closer to home, someone that looks at Harvey Weinstein and says "totally a person I would want to call a friend!". (So, yes, I don't think Tarantino would be a good political leader based on that).

[Love Mountain]

Take a deep breath! None of this is true. A single fellow in a game forum dubs neoliberals (clearly leftwing) as "left". The world hasn't got far right and neo-liberalism isn't called left.

Regardless: yes, communists, socialists, anarchists, radical leftwings etc are vehemently against neoliberalism.
But so are some far-right nationalists and many of the people that believe in the nation-state.

The extra divide of our time shapes to be Globalist vs Nationalist*, on top of Progressive vs Conservative and Left vs Right.

*Nationalist as in a person that believes in national identity and the nation-state, not necessarily the bad things associated with Fascists, Francoists, Nazis etc.

In people's delusions it's "Globalist vs Nationalist". Some people are just too far gone to be able to tell the difference between reality and their far-right reality warping bubble.

[fkizz]

Its called economics (mainly, economies of scale and efficiency increases) and creating a system that makes war impossible. If you read some history, you'll find out that it had been the most succesful project humanity has ever launched carrying a destroyed Europe to become a global economic and cultural power house without destroying itself from stupid nationalist competition.

Do you even realize how Lyrical you sound? Do you think the world is some fairy tale where you make war impossible with some half hazard method?

So global economics = "The Good" while Nationalist = "The Bad" ?

Do you seriously believe things to be this simple or is it rethoric? If things were this simple and fairy tale-esque, why would we need 15 years of schooling minimum?