Our new president - President Emmanuel Macron!
Empathy
Veteran
Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,548
Location: Sovereign Nation & Commonwealth
Never mind, she says. France has surrendered again. Bon, C'est la vie.
she lost heavily, you really need to find a way of ....
You worry too much! Wait.. is it the wine of Revolution that has gone straight to your head?
Last edited by Empathy on 16 May 2017, 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
…
Keep it in the EU, keep the economic whirring, keep the borders open, keep it in the Single Market, not demonise Muslims, and not ally with Trump and Putin.
He'll also copy Angela Merkel's best ever policy and ensure that France takes its fair share of refugees at long last.
…
Yes, allowing in all those refugees probably saved thousands of lives. Not to mention the benefits of multiculturalism. Germany is much better off thanks to all those refugees!
…
The disconnect of the fascist elite from the concerns of ordinary people is EXACTLY why Macron won. You just sit back and call people names while ignoring their suffering and not engaging with their concerns.
…
Believing in borders is a common albeit irrational view shared by many people across the political spectrum. Only neoliberals believe in standing up for your national interests.
…
Sure, some people will try to carry out terrorist attacks even after Macron crushes ISIS. Nothing any political leader could hope to do about that without introducing a police state, which isn't a price worth paying. The police and security services already do a really good job of stopping the pathetic little shrimp who try to commit terrorist attacks. On the rare occasions when one does unfortunately succeed in committing an atrocity, they get crushed immediately. They're losers who keep on losing and never achieve anything. Just like Marine Le Pen.
….
…
Do you think it is a coincidence that the states which embraced globalism are the ones which are the richest?
…
All cultures have value. That's what multiculturalism means. We want the best from every culture. In practice that basically means modern liberal Western culture with a bit of foreign food and some extra religious festivals.
Let’s see.
- Walrus thinks the dominant ideology of neoliberalism has made everything better, but at the same time he thinks the West has been dominated by a fascist elite who have been causing people to suffer.
- He pretends to care about national interests when it’s clear he thinks the whole concept of a nation is irrational.
- He makes out he supports international co-operation, but he doesn’t want France to be friends with America and Russia, two of the largest, most powerful countries on earth.
- He thinks that wealthy Western nations have their economies improved by letting in hundreds of thousands of illiterate Third Worlders.
- He thinks ISIS are going to be scared by a globalist shill like Macron when all Macron is going to do is let a load more potential ISIS-inspired terrorists into his country.
- He implies that open-borders globalism has made rich countries rich while ignoring the fact that they mainly became rich while practising protectionism and old-fashioned imperialism, ie- before they embraced the sort of globalism he favours.
- He talks about evidence based policies when there’s no way of knowing how much better off Western countries might be if they hadn’t been opening their borders for decades.
- Like a parody of a neoliberal he praises multiculturalism before admitting that he thinks all non-Western cultures have to offer the West is ‘foreign food’ (oh, and festivals – right), but he doesn’t explain why Westerners couldn’t just learn the recipes without opening their borders to masses of foreigners.
- And he calls jihadists losers, which kind of reminds me of that buffoon Boris Johnson trying to sound tough talking about a problem he wouldn’t have the balls to do anything about even if he had the opportunity.
It’s all gibberish.
Here's the thing – ultimately people like Walrus parrot neoliberal propaganda because it makes them feel elite in some way. It’s a bit like those nobodies on the internet who quote Neil Degrasse Tyson and go on about how they "f@@@ing love science!" but at least they're relatively harmless.
big if true!
Do people actually believe this silly lie? Do those who keep repeating it actually think that if they repeat it often enough it will become true?
Where is the evidence (as opposed to gossip and rumour) that this accusation is true? I ask because I have yet to see it.
I don't know much about internet security, but I do know about the community. If you had the capacity to understand the evidence, I feel confident that you would know where to find it. I find it amusing when people do that, demand evidence that's too technical for them to understand, and then impute bad motives to the people who can understand it on the basis of their being part of an elite.
Wait, what? How on earth did you "read" all of this into my simple request for the provision of evidence? If "you had the capacity to understand the evidence". What makes you think I wouldn't be able to? Do you think you know me that well?
When someone makes a claim here in print, and fails to back up that claim with something more substantial than rumour, then YES, I DO "impute bad motives" to the person concerned. It's easy enough to shout something inane like "the Russians did it", and I have had enough of that particular nonsense to last me the next ten years, but whenever one of these people are asked to actually back up their wild assertion(s) - with something they are usually completely unfamiliar with (i.e. reason, evidence - that sort of thing) - they then usually try to change the subject in the hope and expectation that they will be believed the next time they lie to us. Apparently they believe that all of us have the same short memories that they possess. Well, no, some of us actually have quite long memories, and simply don't trust those who seem to believe that the promotion of patent nonsense is justified if it furthers a warped political agenda.
It's like in the novel '1984' where there is a special department for the rewriting of history, and everyone seems to play along, conveniently forgetting what was believed to be true just five minutes ago. I well recall how everything was always "the fault of the Russians" back in the 1980's. It's the same old BS once again.
Oops, I forgot to say, "it's the same old RACIST BS once again". You do realise, do you not Mr. Walrus, that hating someone simply because they are Russian, or have alleged connections to Russians, is actually racist. Yes, it is. Why aren't the loony-left social justice warriors making death threats and smashing property over this? Apparently, if one is opposed to the IDEOLOGY of Islam one is "racist", but if one makes allegations that are actually based upon race (ex. "You have connections to Russians!") it's okay. What the... ? I don't get it. Where is the consistency here? Where is that dope Michael Moore when you actually need him?
jrjones9933
Veteran
Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage
How precious.
_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade
Do people actually believe this silly lie? Do those who keep repeating it actually think that if they repeat it often enough it will become true?
Where is the evidence (as opposed to gossip and rumour) that this accusation is true? I ask because I have yet to see it.
According to Reuters:
APT28 last month registered decoy internet addresses to mimic the name of En Marche, which it likely used send tainted emails to hack into the campaign’s computers, Kremez said. Those domains include onedrive-en-marche.fr and mail-en-marche.fr.
Another analyst confirmed he'd found APT28 fingerprints to Fortune.
Found it:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-franc ... SKBN1820BO
It states that:
<quote>France sought to keep a computer hack of frontrunner Emmanuel Macron's campaign emails from influencing the outcome of the presidential election, with the electoral commission warning on Saturday that it may be a criminal offense to republish the data.
Macron's team said a "massive" hack had dumped emails, documents and campaign financing information online just before campaigning ended on Friday and France entered a quiet period, effectively forbidding politicians from commenting on the leak.</quote>
Now the obvious question that no one in the mainstream media wants to ask is, "How can the disclosure of information, via whatever source and method, regarding a major candidate just prior to an election ever be considered to be a bad thing?" Presumably the "campaign emails" would give the average voter a better understanding of who it was they were actually being asked to vote for. Why the need for secrecy? What is contained within these emails that Mr. Macron doesn't want people to know about? Why is it now considered to be a crime, in so many countries, to simply publish information?
How precious.
Well am I actually wrong? That's what matters here. I don't care whether or not you think it's "precious"; that's irrelevant. Don't you despise hypocrisy as well? That's what I see coming from the loony left - double standards.
jrjones9933
Veteran
Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage
…
Keep it in the EU, keep the economic whirring, keep the borders open, keep it in the Single Market, not demonise Muslims, and not ally with Trump and Putin.
He'll also copy Angela Merkel's best ever policy and ensure that France takes its fair share of refugees at long last.
…
Yes, allowing in all those refugees probably saved thousands of lives. Not to mention the benefits of multiculturalism. Germany is much better off thanks to all those refugees!
…
The disconnect of the fascist elite from the concerns of ordinary people is EXACTLY why Macron won. You just sit back and call people names while ignoring their suffering and not engaging with their concerns.
…
Believing in borders is a common albeit irrational view shared by many people across the political spectrum. Only neoliberals believe in standing up for your national interests.
…
Sure, some people will try to carry out terrorist attacks even after Macron crushes ISIS. Nothing any political leader could hope to do about that without introducing a police state, which isn't a price worth paying. The police and security services already do a really good job of stopping the pathetic little shrimp who try to commit terrorist attacks. On the rare occasions when one does unfortunately succeed in committing an atrocity, they get crushed immediately. They're losers who keep on losing and never achieve anything. Just like Marine Le Pen.
….
…
Do you think it is a coincidence that the states which embraced globalism are the ones which are the richest?
…
All cultures have value. That's what multiculturalism means. We want the best from every culture. In practice that basically means modern liberal Western culture with a bit of foreign food and some extra religious festivals.
Let’s see.
- Walrus thinks the dominant ideology of neoliberalism has made everything better, but at the same time he thinks the West has been dominated by a fascist elite who have been causing people to suffer.
- He pretends to care about national interests when it’s clear he thinks the whole concept of a nation is irrational.
- He makes out he supports international co-operation, but he doesn’t want France to be friends with America and Russia, two of the largest, most powerful countries on earth.
- He thinks that wealthy Western nations have their economies improved by letting in hundreds of thousands of illiterate Third Worlders.
- He thinks ISIS are going to be scared by a globalist shill like Macron when all Macron is going to do is let a load more potential ISIS-inspired terrorists into his country.
- He implies that open-borders globalism has made rich countries rich while ignoring the fact that they mainly became rich while practising protectionism and old-fashioned imperialism, ie- before they embraced the sort of globalism he favours.
- He talks about evidence based policies when there’s no way of knowing how much better off Western countries might be if they hadn’t been opening their borders for decades.
- Like a parody of a neoliberal he praises multiculturalism before admitting that he thinks all non-Western cultures have to offer the West is ‘foreign food’ (oh, and festivals – right), but he doesn’t explain why Westerners couldn’t just learn the recipes without opening their borders to masses of foreigners.
- And he calls jihadists losers, which kind of reminds me of that buffoon Boris Johnson trying to sound tough talking about a problem he wouldn’t have the balls to do anything about even if he had the opportunity.
It’s all gibberish.
Here's the thing – ultimately people like Walrus parrot neoliberal propaganda because it makes them feel elite in some way. It’s a bit like those nobodies on the internet who quote Neil Degrasse Tyson and go on about how they "f@@@ing love science!" but at least they're relatively harmless.
big if true!
It's true. No ifs about it.
No, it isn't the source itself (the hackers) that are important here, but what it is that these people hack: the emails. Orange buffoons? Do you have a problem with orange people? That's RACIST!
jrjones9933
Veteran
Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage
No, it isn't the source itself (the hackers) that are important here, but what it is that these people hack: the emails.
Quoted for irony-blindness.
_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade
First the Dutch, and now the French. Countries are waking up and rejecting small-minded isolationism in favour of liberal, centrist, internationalism. All of this despite a last-minute attempt by Russians to discredit Macron by hacking his emails.
Use this thread to discuss and celebrate our new President's triumph over evil!
EN MARCHE!
Stop with the Russia crap. You Leftists blame them as the boogeyman everywhere now yet you LOVED them when they were the USSR.
God yes, I'll drink to that (and I'm an atheistic teetotaler)! Can we all just STOP WITH THE RUSSIA CRAP! I, like so many others, are just sick of hearing it. Virtually no one really believes in this stupid, moronic lie anyway.
No, it isn't the source itself (the hackers) that are important here, but what it is that these people hack: the emails.
Quoted for irony-blindness.
What irony?
jrjones9933
Veteran
Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage
No, it isn't the source itself (the hackers) that are important here, but what it is that these people hack: the emails.
Quoted for irony-blindness.
What irony?
Perfect.
_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade
I'm sorry, I've read this about a dozen times now, and it simply doesn't make any sense. How can cuts, on their own, add up to more money lost when those very same cuts are combined with an INCREASE in welfare payments? This is utterly nonsensical.
In other words, by sinking deeper into debt. Well, at least that's crystal clear.
Yes, those "benefits" according to you include exotic food and restaurants!
So... what other "benefits" are there? None that I can think of, but I'm sure you'll be able to come up with something. Maybe. Nah, maybe I shouldn't hold my breath.
Actually (and unfortunately), I am all too familiar with his dreadful policies! It's gotten to the stage where I am wishing Tony Abbott would make a comeback and oust him. That's how bad it's become.
Wrong, wrong and once again wrong.
Uh... no. I really don't see how some immigrant who is willing to work for peanuts, and who as a result of this willingness takes away the job of a poor factory worker who is already struggling to get by, can possibly "benefit" from the aforementioned "cheap, unskilled labour". Poverty induced by unemployment is not something the working class generally endorses (and for patently obvious reasons). You clearly have no idea, no clue to how things really work in reality. You see the theory seems right - to you - and based upon this and nothing else, manage to convince yourself that because of this there should be no problems whatsoever in either the short or long-term. Lines of unemployed and the sight of homeless people don't bother you one bit, because all that seems to matter is theory, and all evidence to the contrary is conveniently ignored and/or filtered out.