This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies 禄
SunshineGirl 路 36-40, F
CrazyMusicLover 路 31-35
@SunshineGirl I couldn't have said it better myself. Not a fan of Macron but if far-right won, we'd be all lost considering current political situation.
This message was deleted by its author.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
SW-User
Yeah party 馃帄 馃帀 @SunshineGirl
SunshineGirl 路 36-40, F
@BlueGreenGrey Actually I think this system performed that function quite well. The moderate candidates that got knocked out in the first round endorsed Macron. Melenchon, the radical left wing candidate, could not endorse Macron to his supporters but urged them not to vote for le Pen. Macron's party is a broad umbrella. He can be a bit egotistical (not surprising really), but I think he is far less ideological than the main stream politicians he replaced and by far the best leader for a crisis.
MartinII 路 70-79, M
@SunshineGirl It performed the function it was designed for, certainly. Always does.
Kwek00 路 41-45, M
@MartinII
[quote]
[b]Totalitarian[/b]
[i]adjective[/i]
[b]1.[/b] of or relating to a centralized government that does not tolerate parties of differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over many aspects of life.
[b]2.[/b] exercising control over the freedom, will, or thought of others; authoritarian; autocratic.
[i]noun[/i]
[b]3.[/b] an adherent of totalitarianism. [/quote]
[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/totalitarian
[quote][b]Britannica Dictionary definition of TOTALITARIAN[/b]
: controlling the people of a country in a very strict way with complete power that cannot be opposed
a totalitarian regime/state[/quote]
[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/totalitarian
Even if you use "Totalitarian" in an ideological sence, it woulds till mean that the ideology that is totalitarian influences EVERY ASPECT of those subjugated to that ideology. That means that the ideological presence (ussually a clique of ideological insipired people) pushes their ideology in every aspects of the subjugates human life. Meaning it's in the school, on the radio, on the television, ... non stop. It even invades the privacy of peoples home, by demanding that what ever it is the ideology propagates is present in the home. Either by hanging up pictures of leaders, inspiring figures or important events to the ideology [i](like crucifixes and other idols, or pictures of the great leader as is the case in North-Korea)[/i], or by giving away books and phamphlets that have to be cherished [i](like giving away "Mein Kampf" at someones marriage)[/i].
... Where do you find that in Europe? You tell me? If you think that saying that you come over as really stupid is an insult, then you haven't really grasped the reality of comparing the EU with a neo-totalitarian project.
The EU at the moment has 27 member states, all of these states have their own national sovereignity. That's why during the covid-pandemic, certain states started talking about "closing their borders" because national governements can choose to control their borders (because they weren't erased) when the treatie allows it. A treaty that all these countries stepped into WILLINGLY:
[quote]If there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security, a Schengen country may exceptionally temporarily reintroduce border control at its internal borders.[/quote]
[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/policies/schengen-borders-and-visa/schengen-area_en
Exactly because national governements only gave away a small part of their sovereignity in favor of all the benefits they were getting in return. When you look at European descision making, it becomes even more clear how much power individual countries have. Because this painstakingly long process of discussion, reitteration, proposing the law to the EU council - THEN if the EU council refuses, it goes back to the parliament for another reiteration, then it goes back to the EU Council. The EU Council can refuse 3 times, then the bill is automatically removed from the process, and if the EU council approves it will be adopted.
[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process_en
These laws need to be approved unanimously, meaning that every executive-branch of every member state that sits in the council has a veto. Everyone of them. It's so painfully tedious at times, that the EU can't even throw out memberstates that whipe their asses with the founding principles that a state needs to adhere to to become a member. Because Poland and Hungary both secure eachothers position inside the EU even though they have abandoned liberal democracy which is a key aspect for becomming a new member.
The EU council and the EU parliament are all subjected to pluralism, they have factions and members going from the far left to the far right. So even there there is no strict adherence to a single totalitarian ideological project. Unless you want to claim that "Liberalism" is a strict totalitarian project... but again, you are mistaking. Because if there is one ideological position in the entire range of positions that is extremely diverse and plural, it's liberalism. If you want to read up on how chaotic liberalism really is, I just advice you to read: "Liberalism: A Very Short Introduction" by Michael Freeden. Who does a good enough job to explain all the liberal interpretations that are out there. If you don't want to read, just look at parliaments that are formed with a voting system that devides seats proportional. In the Belgian federal parliament alone you have:
NVA: Nationalist Conservative Liberal party
Open VLD: a coalition of classical liberals and some more social liberals
Groen: The green party that is a coalition of social liberals and ecologists
And on the fringes of that liberal center you still find those that swim in the grey area. Those that aren't liberal, but play the liberal ballgame because they have conceded (somewhere in time) that radical authoritarians are worst then the liberal experiment. Here you'll find:
SP.a: On the left you have the Social democrats, that are socialists but have abandoned radicalism in favor of a longer project and play within the liberal framework for as long as it is nescessary to accomplish that goal and avoid Soviet Union like situtations.
CD&V: Christian Democrats, who at some point were way more authoritarian, but kinda learned their lesson in the 1930s and have embraced another type of Christian Democracy that was already being discussed at the end of the 19th century that is less authoritarian but still strives to have Christian values as part of the liberal framework. Something that conservative liberals often also agree on, altough both parts accept the border between church and state.
In all this pluralism, that is all part of all the sovereign nations of the EU. Where every country has a veto power that rests in the current executive branch... you claim that the EU is a neo-totalitarian project? That's stupid, if you don't recognise it's stupid, you better have a good argument for me. But it's extremely stupid. And that's not an insult, it's just what it is.
[quote]
[b]Totalitarian[/b]
[i]adjective[/i]
[b]1.[/b] of or relating to a centralized government that does not tolerate parties of differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over many aspects of life.
[b]2.[/b] exercising control over the freedom, will, or thought of others; authoritarian; autocratic.
[i]noun[/i]
[b]3.[/b] an adherent of totalitarianism. [/quote]
[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/totalitarian
[quote][b]Britannica Dictionary definition of TOTALITARIAN[/b]
: controlling the people of a country in a very strict way with complete power that cannot be opposed
a totalitarian regime/state[/quote]
[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/totalitarian
Even if you use "Totalitarian" in an ideological sence, it woulds till mean that the ideology that is totalitarian influences EVERY ASPECT of those subjugated to that ideology. That means that the ideological presence (ussually a clique of ideological insipired people) pushes their ideology in every aspects of the subjugates human life. Meaning it's in the school, on the radio, on the television, ... non stop. It even invades the privacy of peoples home, by demanding that what ever it is the ideology propagates is present in the home. Either by hanging up pictures of leaders, inspiring figures or important events to the ideology [i](like crucifixes and other idols, or pictures of the great leader as is the case in North-Korea)[/i], or by giving away books and phamphlets that have to be cherished [i](like giving away "Mein Kampf" at someones marriage)[/i].
... Where do you find that in Europe? You tell me? If you think that saying that you come over as really stupid is an insult, then you haven't really grasped the reality of comparing the EU with a neo-totalitarian project.
The EU at the moment has 27 member states, all of these states have their own national sovereignity. That's why during the covid-pandemic, certain states started talking about "closing their borders" because national governements can choose to control their borders (because they weren't erased) when the treatie allows it. A treaty that all these countries stepped into WILLINGLY:
[quote]If there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security, a Schengen country may exceptionally temporarily reintroduce border control at its internal borders.[/quote]
[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/policies/schengen-borders-and-visa/schengen-area_en
Exactly because national governements only gave away a small part of their sovereignity in favor of all the benefits they were getting in return. When you look at European descision making, it becomes even more clear how much power individual countries have. Because this painstakingly long process of discussion, reitteration, proposing the law to the EU council - THEN if the EU council refuses, it goes back to the parliament for another reiteration, then it goes back to the EU Council. The EU Council can refuse 3 times, then the bill is automatically removed from the process, and if the EU council approves it will be adopted.
[b]SOURCE:[/b] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process_en
These laws need to be approved unanimously, meaning that every executive-branch of every member state that sits in the council has a veto. Everyone of them. It's so painfully tedious at times, that the EU can't even throw out memberstates that whipe their asses with the founding principles that a state needs to adhere to to become a member. Because Poland and Hungary both secure eachothers position inside the EU even though they have abandoned liberal democracy which is a key aspect for becomming a new member.
The EU council and the EU parliament are all subjected to pluralism, they have factions and members going from the far left to the far right. So even there there is no strict adherence to a single totalitarian ideological project. Unless you want to claim that "Liberalism" is a strict totalitarian project... but again, you are mistaking. Because if there is one ideological position in the entire range of positions that is extremely diverse and plural, it's liberalism. If you want to read up on how chaotic liberalism really is, I just advice you to read: "Liberalism: A Very Short Introduction" by Michael Freeden. Who does a good enough job to explain all the liberal interpretations that are out there. If you don't want to read, just look at parliaments that are formed with a voting system that devides seats proportional. In the Belgian federal parliament alone you have:
NVA: Nationalist Conservative Liberal party
Open VLD: a coalition of classical liberals and some more social liberals
Groen: The green party that is a coalition of social liberals and ecologists
And on the fringes of that liberal center you still find those that swim in the grey area. Those that aren't liberal, but play the liberal ballgame because they have conceded (somewhere in time) that radical authoritarians are worst then the liberal experiment. Here you'll find:
SP.a: On the left you have the Social democrats, that are socialists but have abandoned radicalism in favor of a longer project and play within the liberal framework for as long as it is nescessary to accomplish that goal and avoid Soviet Union like situtations.
CD&V: Christian Democrats, who at some point were way more authoritarian, but kinda learned their lesson in the 1930s and have embraced another type of Christian Democracy that was already being discussed at the end of the 19th century that is less authoritarian but still strives to have Christian values as part of the liberal framework. Something that conservative liberals often also agree on, altough both parts accept the border between church and state.
In all this pluralism, that is all part of all the sovereign nations of the EU. Where every country has a veto power that rests in the current executive branch... you claim that the EU is a neo-totalitarian project? That's stupid, if you don't recognise it's stupid, you better have a good argument for me. But it's extremely stupid. And that's not an insult, it's just what it is.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment