Liberté, égalité, fraternité
John Stewart explains to his American audience that, not only do other countries exist, there are also other presidential elections.
Sacre bleu!
And also this from Stephen Colbert
Oh, la la!
What Colbert doesn't understand (or maybe is simply ignoring) is the fact that the French Socialist party is actually centre-left. Their socialist party is part of Socialist International, to which even former Left parties like the ALP still belong. That's right, in France the word "socialiste" never really attracted the same stigma as it did in English-speaking countries. For something more radical you have to go to the French Communist party, which actually has a credible candidate who gets media air-time. Even more radical but still well-known are two Trotskyist parties, the Worker's Struggle and its more successful offshoot, the Revolutionary Communist League (4.08%). As a Fabian, all this revolutionary language does worry me a little. But I'm just glad to see that some countries still have a thriving left.
So Colbert's remarks are quite wide of the mark. In fact, Ségolène Royal is closer to Third Way politics, although I doubt she's as bad as Bill Clinton, Tony Blair or Kevin Rudd.
Update - 2007/5/7
Well, Nicolas Sarkozy won the second round. Here's what Étienne Colbert has to say about it:
posted by Nick @ 10:02 am
4 comments
4 Comments:
How does France pass itself off as a major international player anyway? How ever did France get the right to veto at the UN for example???
Don't have the time right now to do the sort of research necessary to answer this question properly (eg finding out whether that veto applies to all UN resolutions or just the security council) but I'll take a stab at it -
France has nukes. (Which they like to test in the Pacific.) I think this is sufficient to get a permanent seat on the security council.
The real question is: Why does any country have a veto? Why are there permanent seats on the security council? It doesn't sound very democratic to me! Either it's by consensus or it's by majority rules. I don't see how anyone could justify the veto system. (Except Drew. His "America has the nukes, they trump every other country" argument can be very persuasive after a long night at Pamfers.)
When I toured the UN building in December last year, at the security council's chamber the guide explained that sanctions had just been placed on Iran for developing nuclear weapons. This didn't sit right with me, knowing that permanent members like the USA, the UK, France and Russia all had nukes of their own. I asked the guide who explained that the Non-Proliferation Treaty only insisted that countries acquiring nuclear weapons openly declare that they have them. (No one likes exploding surprises.) These other countries have always admitted that they have nukes (and are willing to use them!). So I asked her about Israel's refusal to admit that they have nuclear weapons, and the recent gaffe by their PM(?) who accidentally admitted to it. She just scoffed and said, "Everyone knows Israel has nuclear weapons!" Yes, they do, thanks to Mordechai Vanunu but that doesn't affect the Israeli government's dishonesty. I haven't looked into it but I can only assume that Israel is not signatory to the non-proliferation treaty.
When we go the the Hiroshima exhibit I asked the guide about the UN's attitude towards countries that already openly have nuclear weapons. She said something about gently encouraging them to disarm. Pfffffft!
Hush Nick. You revealed that you're a Fabian. Tut tut. I guess you're not a true Green at all...
What are you talking about? The Greens don't believe in revolutions, they're ex-communists.
Maybe I should have spelt "fabian" with a small "f", given that I'm not a member of the Fabian Society. I thought about it briefly until I saw from their web site that the Australian one, at least, is actually a Labor Party front.
Post a Comment
<< Home