Completely irrelevant comparison.... France is a democracy. You gather enough support and can fore an early election and get a different parliamentary majority. You can beat any legislation democratically.
Come on Pintu, I know that much. But democracy or not, the eruption of such a fierce protest is an anthropological phenomenon in whatever the system, or part of the world, or the context it happens. I was not discussing the reason for the protest, but admiring how genuine and passionate and inspired and intense event it is apparently turning out to be. I doubt that the majority of young people rioting in Paris at this moment really care about the pensions. They are demonstrating not only their dissatisfaction and anger with the lying ways of their government, but also the accumulated frustration, and anxiety, and even rage with so many possible issues. And, like so many times in the past, more than any other nation, French just don't want to accept to be told what to do. Instead, they go out and burn down l'Hȏtel de Ville (again).
do you know what intensified the protests
This kind of direct attack on a symbol of french state power will move the average patriotic Jacques away from his natural sympathy for protestors...a more measured approach is needed. Less hot-headedness and more acknowledgement of economic realities. This unruly protest will solidify a negative image of the country, turning investors away, and of course harm workers. Just like minimum wage, maximum hours, firing protection, and other regressive legislation eventually only harms workers.
e- nvm, he got here first
Yeah people seem to be debating if the idea of raising or lowering the pension is a good idea, completely missing the point Macron has forced this through without any votes.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The other point is that Macron was elected with the knowledge that the reform of the pension age was going to be done this term. It's not something he's suddenly pulled out of the hat. Just before the vote was due to take place, the cross-party committees in parliament and the senate had agreed.
I don't pretend to understand the French constitution but there should be a way to determine what is democratic or undemocratic and it should be used, and if there isn't then there is the next election where Macron could be voted out and his policies reversed.
It's Macron's last tenure. This reform was supposed to happen between 2017-2022 but due to covid it didn't and he was criticized by the opposition for not respecting his reform promises, then this reform was also part of his campaign for the 2022-2027 tenure, he was elected with this reform among others being key points. The only thing undemocratic here is a minority who seem to think that their views are more important than the view of the majority of people that actually voted.
I did wonder if the French had a two-term policy like the yanks but I was too lazy to look it up, thanks.
It is law that the President of the Republic cannot serve more than 2 consecutive terms. However, the way they put it does not seem to say Macron cannot make a comeback after he's done in 2027 if his successor has a poor presidency during the 2027-2032 period.
Isn't that what Putin did? We could end up with Trump, Putin and Macron with Trump as the only 'legitimate' president. Oh god there's Johnson trying to come back as well, I need a beer.
Macron will only be 54 years old in 2032. So that is quite an exceptional situation we are witnessing since past French presidents were much older while presidential terms used to last 7 years instead of 5 prior to Jacques Chirac's second term.
History shows differently when unjust goverments are in power. Violence is the solution
What exactly is undemocratic? The law was voted by the senate and there will still be a vote of no confidence in the parliament on Monday. If the government is toppled down, the law won't be adopted... Only if the government survives the vote, then the law passes. That's how their constitution work.
constitutional =/= democratic.
That debate is a bit more complicated than that. At this point, it becomes very subjective. What can the democratically elected rulers use within their constitutional powers, and what can they not? Who gets to decide that some articles are undemocratic, despite them being used many times since they got introduced in a democratically approved constitution, one that has survived different democratic power shift (presidents and legislative majorities alike).
you know exactly what's unusual here but are dodging it. sure.
When we believe that all laws are democratic and just and we shouldnt protest because the law says and they were vote and constitution was voted etc is when we are fecked up.
Macron got 27% of the voters in the first round?
77.77% turn out...meaning 20% of france
That was the first round, in the second round it was not 27%. He got more than anyone else. Are you saying people like Mélenchon or Le Pen got more, No.
70% against the proposal as per Buster's article.
Where does the 70% come from? He's been elected twice as President on the manifesto and after not going through with it the first time because of Covid he got criticised for not carrying out his manifesto by the same people who are protesting now. The vote would have been very tight on whether the reform would have passed, it was a matter of a few votes after it had been agreed by all parties. We'll see what happens in the coming week.
This and the above post by Paul make interesting reading.
Yes, you need a certain amount of years contributing into the system in order to get a full pension, you can retire earlier but it won't be a full pension. Currently it's 40 years, from 2027 it will increase to 43 years depending on when you are born and in 2035 it will be for everyone. That reform(Loi Tourraine) is from December 18 2013 and needs to be modified because it makes little sense, some of the people that are blocking the reform created that law and they have to know that they created an issue that needs fixing but somehow they decided to blame the current government, some of the opposition is for that reform but decided that they would block it for a reasons that have nothing to do with logic, democracy or the interest of the public.
You are barking up the wrong tree here. I didn‘t defend the bill itself, I do like union workers and I am not opposed to the protests in themselves but I am opposed to the violence. And there is too much violence. Suggesting a recently fairly elected president is illegitimate and calling for violence against elected politicians is much more dangerous for democracy than any possible maneuvering within the constitution.you know exactly what's unusual here but are dodging it. sure.
this law's passage is a perfect example of democracy. but coddled union workers are opposed to it. imo they're still right to protest because i like coddled union workers, and you don't so it's constitutional and democratic and complicated
Are they really acting like they disagree? I am reading that they will vote/abstain to keep the government in place which de facto means the bill passes. This suggest there was a deal to be made with them and Macron didn‘t go for it. This will turn out to be a huge mistake if the violence and the strikes continue. And his second term has just started.
Thank you again for this.
Yes, they are pretending, they have been doing it for months on every platform they can while failing to actually have a clue about anything. And there is no deal to make, the issue isn't about the bill, it's certain groups trying to be a disturbance for the sake of it.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Apparently that was debunked, he gave the exact model and it's only worth about 1k. He took it off because it was clanking on the table. Still a twat thoughMacron realizing his 800k watch is in poor taste mid interview and taking it off under the table. What a twat
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Ah really? That's such a boring explanation.Apparently that was debunked, he gave the exact model and it's only worth about 1k. He took it off because it was clanking on the table. Still a twat though
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What the hell did Xi sell to him in their last meeting? The man looks just as bad and pathetic as Viktor Orbán now.
.
