Namiskine Posted September 5 Posted September 5 And Macron did so in order to please the far-right... as the result of an election whose 2nd round was literally "let's beat the far-right" He's never beating the "Plutôt Hitler que le Front Populaire" allegations 1
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 9 minutes ago, Princess Aurora said: Oh Elon Musk's virtual asylum is the beacon of truth and justice Btw it's weird but I don't trust X/Twitter at all. Good thing the source isn't actually Twitter I guess?
Lament Posted September 5 Posted September 5 2 hours ago, Space Cowboy said: I asked chatgpt So what is the truth? Is OP lying? ChatGPT is the one lying. And also you for using it as truth. You could have just checked his Wikipedia page instead. It would have taken 1 more minute. He was a member of parliament in 1982. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Barnier
aadrl1 Posted September 5 Posted September 5 So the OP is just out here spreading fake news from Elon's X 1 5
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 (edited) 7 minutes ago, aadrl1 said: So the OP is just out here spreading fake news from Elon's X If it was a fake news from Elon's X as you said, it would probably be something actually defending this homophobic trash, you are so damn embarrassing Edited September 5 by Squall
Pendulum Posted September 5 Posted September 5 (edited) 2 hours ago, Squall said: Educate yourself Educate myself on what girl, your post is literally misleading. I'm not well versed in French politics nor do I know who this new PM is, so the thread title was the only reason I clicked on your thread. Imagine my discontent where I could not find a single thing about "homosexuality decriminalisation" in your post or the article you had linked. You could've clarified because we ended up lost in translation. Edited September 5 by Pendulum 2 1
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 7 minutes ago, Pendulum said: Educate myself on what girl, your post is literally misleading. I'm not well versed in French politics nor do I know who this new PM is, so the thread title was the only reason I clicked on your thread. Imagine my discontent where I could not find a single thing about "homosexuality decriminalisation" in your post or the article you had linked. You could've clarified because we ended up lost in translation. You wrote that homosexuality has been decriminalized since 1791, yes, go educate yourself
Pendulum Posted September 5 Posted September 5 3 minutes ago, Squall said: You wrote that homosexuality has been decriminalized since 1791, yes, go educate yourself Legal "The law of 1791 decriminalized homosexual activity, however, it does not recognize homosexuality itself." https://www.equaldex.com/region/france Legalising homosexual acts and age of consent for said acts are not the same but go off
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 Just now, Pendulum said: Legal "The law of 1791 decriminalized homosexual activity, however, it does not recognize homosexuality itself." https://www.equaldex.com/region/france Legalising homosexual acts and age of consent for said acts are not the same but go off 1. The law was still saying having sex with a person of the same sex was « against nature » 2. The fact age made a criminal difference between straight sexual relationships and homosexual ones means… homosexuality was criminalized.
Luminary Posted September 5 Posted September 5 1 hour ago, Squall said: A post based on an actual article, you could also read the thread you are posting in instead of playing stupid Best believe I read the thread sis, responders had valid questions as you posted a title with little to no context and a link to an artcile (because yes I read that too) with no mention of what you actually titled your post.. For you to be this easily offended and attack other posters with questions, is just childish. Bye x
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 1 minute ago, Luminary said: Best believe I read the thread sis, responders had valid questions as you posted a title with little to no context and a link to an artcile (because yes I read that too) with no mention of what you actually titled your post.. For you to be this easily offended and attack other posters with questions, is just childish. Bye x Did you avoid @Communion's post on purpose then? Because it was very clear
family.guy123 Posted September 5 Posted September 5 5 minutes ago, Squall said: Did you avoid @Communion's post on purpose then? Because it was very clear Maybe you should've let them make the thread then? Do y'all just tag that user whenever you need their help? LOL 4
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 (edited) 2 minutes ago, family.guy123 said: Maybe you should've let them make the thread then? Do y'all just tag that user whenever you need their help? LOL I don't know this user? The article I posted in the OP's point was just to give the news Macron named Michel Bargnier as PM. I simply added what he voted for in the title to give a context to what that man did/where he is in the political scale. Edited September 5 by Squall
Mr.X Posted September 5 Posted September 5 He is also from the party that came FOURTH in the election and is a liberal-right monster. Macron is being an authoritarian ******* who hates the left and would rather get in bed with the fascists than uphold democracy. May he never rest in peace for the rest of his days on heart.
family.guy123 Posted September 5 Posted September 5 Just now, Squall said: I don't know this user? The article I posted in the OP's point was just to give the news Macron named Michel Bargnier as PM. I simply added what he voted for in the title to give a context to what that man did. Why did you tag them then? You made a low effort thread with no back up and are tagging other users to come to your defence when others rightfully call you out on your BS. 4
ctlp27 Posted September 5 Posted September 5 38 minutes ago, Namiskine said: And Macron did so in order to please the far-right... as the result of an election whose 2nd round was literally "let's beat the far-right" He's never beating the "Plutôt Hitler que le Front Populaire" allegations That is your perspective. It appears that Macron chose a Prime Minister who cannot be immediately censured by any party with the power to do so. This does not necessarily mean that Macron supports Barnier. In fact, he offered positions to both left and right parties, such as Cazeneuve and Bertrand, but they had parties vouching to censure them. If Macron couldn't select someone from his own majority, what other options did he have? The Socialist party made a dumb decision to say they would censure their own former PM in order to please LFI. Alternatively, they may have recognized - unlike what the left is falsely claiming everywhere - that they did not have a sufficient majority to effectively govern and believed that remaining in the opposition would be more advantageous in the long run. No amendements to program, no majority.
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 3 minutes ago, family.guy123 said: Why did you tag them then? You made a low effort thread with no back up and are tagging other users to come to your defence when others rightfully call you out on your BS. Because his post summed up the problem in that PM's vote and the user ignored it? I didn't tag him « to come to my defence », what the hell are you even talking about
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 5 minutes ago, ctlp27 said: That is your perspective. It appears that Macron chose a Prime Minister who cannot be immediately censured by any party with the power to do so. This does not necessarily mean that Macron supports Barnier. In fact, he offered positions to both left and right parties, such as Cazeneuve and Bertrand, but they had parties vouching to censure them. If Macron couldn't select someone from his own majority, what other options did he have? The Socialist party made a dumb decision to say they would censure their own former PM in order to please LFI. Alternatively, they may have recognized - unlike what the left is falsely claiming everywhere - that they did not have a sufficient majority to effectively govern and believed that remaining in the opposition would be more advantageous in the long run. No amendements to program, no majority. Of course Macron is looking for the RN's support, this is not a « perspective »
ctlp27 Posted September 5 Posted September 5 5 minutes ago, Squall said: Of course Macron is looking for the RN's support, this is not a « perspective » It is. Barnier is not a prime minister of his own majority or his own party (which announced that they would not support fully Barnier agenda). Would you have said the same if he had appointed a left-wing prime minister whom Le Pen had promised not to censure immediately?
Squall Posted September 5 Author Posted September 5 (edited) 2 minutes ago, ctlp27 said: It is. Barnier is not a prime minister of his own majority or his own party (which announced that they would not support fully Barnier agenda). Would you have said the same if he had appointed a left-wing prime minister whom Le Pen had promised not to censure immediately? Obviously not since it would have been based on the biggest majority after the election. People voted for the left alliance knowing it was an alliance. It's not the same when you take into consideration alliances that were made AFTER people voted. In the end, Macron still associated his choice with the RN while fighting them. Edited September 5 by Squall
Namiskine Posted September 5 Posted September 5 1 hour ago, ctlp27 said: That is your perspective. It appears that Macron chose a Prime Minister who cannot be immediately censured by any party with the power to do so. This does not necessarily mean that Macron supports Barnier. In fact, he offered positions to both left and right parties, such as Cazeneuve and Bertrand, but they had parties vouching to censure them. If Macron couldn't select someone from his own majority, what other options did he have? The Socialist party made a dumb decision to say they would censure their own former PM in order to please LFI. Alternatively, they may have recognized - unlike what the left is falsely claiming everywhere - that they did not have a sufficient majority to effectively govern and believed that remaining in the opposition would be more advantageous in the long run. No amendements to program, no majority. That's not a perspective, that's facts. Not a single party has the ability to censure a Prime Minister on its own. He could have endorsed the "Republican Front", and within it, its own defeat, and ask his own party to deal with a Leftist government. It's cute to ask the Left to make compromises on its program - which Castets said she was willing to do - and then literally say in every media that they won't accept any measure coming from its program. What's the point of a, let's say, Cazeneuve, if we're going to still have Macron's program? Truth is Macron's priority is to keep deploying his neo-liberal program, and it's way easier to do agreements within the right-wing parties themselves - even if that means implicitly accepting a majority with Le Pen by naming Barnier. 1
SlowGinFizzzz Posted September 5 Posted September 5 Interesting, I wasn't aware of his past (?) homophobic stances. I mostly know him from his role as the EU's chief Brexit negotiator with the UK, and from what I remember he was pretty much universally respected all across the political spectrum, so based on that I suppose he might be a good choice as Prime Minister. As a European citizen, I hope he can help create a stable government for France and by extension for all of Europe; it's bad enough that German politics is as messy as it is right now.
ctlp27 Posted September 6 Posted September 6 22 hours ago, Namiskine said: That's not a perspective, that's facts. Not a single party has the ability to censure a Prime Minister on its own. He could have endorsed the "Republican Front", and within it, its own defeat, and ask his own party to deal with a Leftist government. It's cute to ask the Left to make compromises on its program - which Castets said she was willing to do - and then literally say in every media that they won't accept any measure coming from its program. What's the point of a, let's say, Cazeneuve, if we're going to still have Macron's program? Truth is Macron's priority is to keep deploying his neo-liberal program, and it's way easier to do agreements within the right-wing parties themselves - even if that means implicitly accepting a majority with Le Pen by naming Barnier. Castet mentioned that she might consider working on compromises weeks after being "chosen" to be Prime Minister by NFP (once she realized she would never actually become PM). Initially, both her statements and those from LFI immediately following the results were adamant: "no compromises at all." This indicates that they never attempted to seek support beyond their own group. Macron's party had only one condition for offering support: no LFI ministers in a leftist government. The left refused this condition (and they had the right to do so). By eliminating Cazeneuve's chance of becoming PM, they left Macron with no choice but to look to the right for a PM. Considering what we know Cazeneuve communicated to Macron (which was closely aligned with what the NFP wanted to achieve), it was either a very poor decision by the Socialists to disown one of their own, or it was a clear indication that they preferred not to govern, likely disappointing many of their voters who hoped they would take on that responsibility. Choosing Castet was already an initial sign that they had no intention of governing. She had no experience within parliament and was not even a candidate in the legislative election. It was such an absurd choice that it was evident they never really intended to have a PM capable of making deals to pass legislation, especially given their need for at least 90 extra votes to secure a majority.
Communion Posted September 6 Posted September 6 42 minutes ago, ctlp27 said: Macron's party had only one condition for offering support: no LFI ministers in a leftist government. The left refused this condition Can you elaborate on this? I saw something claiming Melenchon called Macron's bluff and agreed to this condition and Macron still refused? 1
ctlp27 Posted September 6 Posted September 6 40 minutes ago, Communion said: Can you elaborate on this? I saw something claiming Melenchon called Macron's bluff and agreed to this condition and Macron still refused? This was the initial request from Macron's party after the election, and to be honest, from all other MP groups outside their alliance as well. When Mélenchon changed his stance in the tweet you're referring to, almost two months had passed. I believe (though I would need to verify) that by then, Macron had already decided that Castet would not last the first week after he met with NFP and her, as the far right had stated in their own meeting they would censure her at the first opportunity, along with the right-wing party if she were appointed. At this point, the issue seemed to have evolved from "no LFI ministers" to "no LFI minister and repeal of pension reform by decree" (again would need to recheck the timeline).
Recommended Posts