Since I read Submission, I've also believed France will be the first Western nation to succumb to civil war. People talk about "France" as if it's some longstanding institution like "England". It's not. France is currently on it's "5th Republic". You know what happened to the first 4?
1st: 15 years. Nonstop war. Dictatorship: Napoleon.
2nd: 4 years. Franco-Prussian War. Dictatorship: Napoleon, first one's nephew.
3rd: 60 years. WWII: occupying military dictatorship.
4th: 12 years. Algerian war / civil war. De Gaulle's Constitution.
5th: 70 years but starting to fray.
Bottom line, unlike the English, the French have a very poor track record with representative democracy.
French soldier: "I must point out that this is my biggest disagreement with the generals: they think that civil war must be avoided."
Michel Houllebecq's novel Submission (which I highly recommend) features a Left-Islamist alliance forming to prevent the far-right from coming to power. It sounded absurd in 2016. Less absurd now. In fact, it began last weekend: Menelchon is an open antisemite and effectively pro-Hamas.
Immigration is the lynchpin here because it allies the Left's border-are-racist people with Macron's chamber-of-commerce centrists and Les Republicains country-club blue-bloods. All 3 of them benefit economically or politically from unchecked immigration, while the French working class pays the price.
Love the Turkish statement: "Following the unpleasant incident that took place in Kayseri, provocative actions were carried out against Syrians last night". Translation: "the refugee who raped a teenager was bad, but y'all are worse for noticing." I wonder if this sort of thing will cause Erdogan to rethink his gradual undoing of Ataturk's secularization policies?
Black man who's playing booming loud music from his car to cop: “No disrespect, but I feel like I’m doing my thing.” This is Mill's "maximal individual autonomy" premise in real life. We can't stop someone who is obviously disturbing hundreds of neighbors because... he has a right to "do his thing".
This happened 2 days ago in my neck of the woods: https://sfstandard.com/2024/06/23/bay-bridge-sideshow-ends-with-fireworks-noise-and-no-arrests/ Hundreds of people and 100+ cars illegally closed the San Francisco Bay Bridge at 1 AM and to do donuts. This is the easiest environment in the world to crack down on -- IT'S A BRIDGE, there are only 2 ways off! Put a line of cop cars and a hundred riot police at each end and start walking. Arrest every human being. Impound and tow every vehicle. We won't do it. I think there were 4 arrests.
You have to wonder if American superpowerdom is the reason why the Fifth Republic has lasted for as long as it has. That's the only major factor present during the time of the current regime versus that of the previous regimes. Interestingly, South Korea, since its establishment in 1948, is currently in its sixth republic, though they don't refer to it as such. It's interesting to see that over its history, the French Republic has been arguably the least stable of European powers.
There's a growing consensus among those who have their feet planted on the ground - which, unfortunately, doesn't include much of the radical right - that remigration and mass deportation are by-and-large impossible at this point. You could try, but it'd likely overwhelm your resources and wouldn't have the intended outcome. The same voices also proffer that the only alternative is military dictatorship. In France's case, a military dictatorship would be the outcome of a civil war, but it'd have to be a fairly prolonged one. Like Rod Dreher was saying the other day, it's likely to look more like The Troubles of Northern Ireland, an urban insurgency, rather than a high-intensity conflict. So we're probably looking at years and years of this stuff before the environment emerges where the military has no choice but to step in.
Typing this response out to you made me realize that a luxury, a term I use extremely loosely, that France has the U.S. doesn't is that the enemy is largely well-defined, the two sides well-defined. In The U.S., I'm still not sure what the two sides in our brewing internal conflict is. Yes, it does fall along political lines, yes, the hardcore partisans comprise 2/3rds of the country. Still, we lack sectarianism, it's still easy to avoid people you don't like, and there really isn't a single issue that defines our conflict the way demographics/immigration does in France. Crime and immigration correlate, but nowhere near as strong as they do in France.
If I had to boil it down to any one issue, it'd be the increasing disorder in the country. I like to think most people still want to live in a safe and orderly society, and anyone who sows danger and disorder is a hostile who we need to open fire on. The issue is complicated by two key fracture points, the same ones we've been dealing with since time immemorial: the Black population and how much power the central government should have, especially when it's clear they use that power so irresponsibly. It's going to be interesting to see where that red line finally gets drawn.
It'll also be about more fundamental, day-to-day matters, like whether you can go shopping without being hassled by a YouTube prankster, whether you can defend yourself in public, etc. One side will defend the rights of your tormenters, while the other side will insist on civil behavior.
I've since backed away from an insurgency as a scenario, so it's going to be interesting what form our conflict takes.
The French election results are a disappointment for the right only compared to expectations. The fact that Le Pen is even a possible victor would have been unthinkable a few years ago. A swing of just a few points would push her over. Political parties knocking on the door usually get to victory in the end.
There is a French meme “Nicolas, 30 ans” that shows a hard pressed young man being taxed on the one hand to support wealthy boomers and on the other hand the entitled migrant. The centre-right continues to exist in Europe with the support of smug boomers, but the young on the right see no point in them.
So far it’s mainly young males who have moved right. I wouldn’t be shocked to see the women follow at some point, although they tend to be slower to move than males.
There is a very bitter tone to today’s politics throughout the West, including Canada where I live. With an aging society, high government debt, stringent environmental policies, and high migration, the economy has become a zero sum game. Zero sum games are inherently bitter and high conflict.
The ultimate problem is that we can’t offer everything to everyone, and the policies of the left just make things worse. So you get disappointed expectations and a lot of finger pointing.
France lacks a male-female political divide. Young women supporting RN was definitely a head-scratcher for the Left. The UK also lacks a gender divide, though that's primarily due to the fact both young men and women lean left, far more than their USA counterparts. That all said, as long as women benefit from the status quo more than men, they'll be behind the curve compared to men.
I think we're at a point where young men and women are both noticing something is deeply wrong, but the same way leftists call 911 when something bad happens to them, they're seeking refuge in the establishment. This explains why sentiments are either entrenched on the left or at least not changing. I've had many arguments (mildly speaking) with people who think we're on the cusp of a major right-wing revolution or political realignment because information travels so much faster today, but people's minds don't change en masse in a few years. You can't argue that point, however, by mentioning trends, which are absolutely working against the Right. Then they resort to something lazy like, "It doesn't take many." Okay, but the U.S. has over 330 million. Even a few thousand isn't going to do much, unless they do something crazy like seize the White House. If your political movement relies on low-probably events occurring and their consequences working out in your favor, it's not much of a political movement.
What you said about bitter tone is a big reason why I think something like an economic crisis is likely to entrench existing beliefs rather than change minds. Changing your mind is a concession that you were wrong and most people don't like to admit they were wrong. Also, while cultural and social issues still have strong currency, people aren't going to vote for the other side if that means conceding on those issues.
Since I read Submission, I've also believed France will be the first Western nation to succumb to civil war. People talk about "France" as if it's some longstanding institution like "England". It's not. France is currently on it's "5th Republic". You know what happened to the first 4?
1st: 15 years. Nonstop war. Dictatorship: Napoleon.
2nd: 4 years. Franco-Prussian War. Dictatorship: Napoleon, first one's nephew.
3rd: 60 years. WWII: occupying military dictatorship.
4th: 12 years. Algerian war / civil war. De Gaulle's Constitution.
5th: 70 years but starting to fray.
Bottom line, unlike the English, the French have a very poor track record with representative democracy.
French soldier: "I must point out that this is my biggest disagreement with the generals: they think that civil war must be avoided."
Michel Houllebecq's novel Submission (which I highly recommend) features a Left-Islamist alliance forming to prevent the far-right from coming to power. It sounded absurd in 2016. Less absurd now. In fact, it began last weekend: Menelchon is an open antisemite and effectively pro-Hamas.
Immigration is the lynchpin here because it allies the Left's border-are-racist people with Macron's chamber-of-commerce centrists and Les Republicains country-club blue-bloods. All 3 of them benefit economically or politically from unchecked immigration, while the French working class pays the price.
Love the Turkish statement: "Following the unpleasant incident that took place in Kayseri, provocative actions were carried out against Syrians last night". Translation: "the refugee who raped a teenager was bad, but y'all are worse for noticing." I wonder if this sort of thing will cause Erdogan to rethink his gradual undoing of Ataturk's secularization policies?
Black man who's playing booming loud music from his car to cop: “No disrespect, but I feel like I’m doing my thing.” This is Mill's "maximal individual autonomy" premise in real life. We can't stop someone who is obviously disturbing hundreds of neighbors because... he has a right to "do his thing".
This happened 2 days ago in my neck of the woods: https://sfstandard.com/2024/06/23/bay-bridge-sideshow-ends-with-fireworks-noise-and-no-arrests/ Hundreds of people and 100+ cars illegally closed the San Francisco Bay Bridge at 1 AM and to do donuts. This is the easiest environment in the world to crack down on -- IT'S A BRIDGE, there are only 2 ways off! Put a line of cop cars and a hundred riot police at each end and start walking. Arrest every human being. Impound and tow every vehicle. We won't do it. I think there were 4 arrests.
After all, they were just "doing their thing".
You have to wonder if American superpowerdom is the reason why the Fifth Republic has lasted for as long as it has. That's the only major factor present during the time of the current regime versus that of the previous regimes. Interestingly, South Korea, since its establishment in 1948, is currently in its sixth republic, though they don't refer to it as such. It's interesting to see that over its history, the French Republic has been arguably the least stable of European powers.
There's a growing consensus among those who have their feet planted on the ground - which, unfortunately, doesn't include much of the radical right - that remigration and mass deportation are by-and-large impossible at this point. You could try, but it'd likely overwhelm your resources and wouldn't have the intended outcome. The same voices also proffer that the only alternative is military dictatorship. In France's case, a military dictatorship would be the outcome of a civil war, but it'd have to be a fairly prolonged one. Like Rod Dreher was saying the other day, it's likely to look more like The Troubles of Northern Ireland, an urban insurgency, rather than a high-intensity conflict. So we're probably looking at years and years of this stuff before the environment emerges where the military has no choice but to step in.
Typing this response out to you made me realize that a luxury, a term I use extremely loosely, that France has the U.S. doesn't is that the enemy is largely well-defined, the two sides well-defined. In The U.S., I'm still not sure what the two sides in our brewing internal conflict is. Yes, it does fall along political lines, yes, the hardcore partisans comprise 2/3rds of the country. Still, we lack sectarianism, it's still easy to avoid people you don't like, and there really isn't a single issue that defines our conflict the way demographics/immigration does in France. Crime and immigration correlate, but nowhere near as strong as they do in France.
If I had to boil it down to any one issue, it'd be the increasing disorder in the country. I like to think most people still want to live in a safe and orderly society, and anyone who sows danger and disorder is a hostile who we need to open fire on. The issue is complicated by two key fracture points, the same ones we've been dealing with since time immemorial: the Black population and how much power the central government should have, especially when it's clear they use that power so irresponsibly. It's going to be interesting to see where that red line finally gets drawn.
Agreed. Our conflict will be messier, more defined by culture and less by race.
Europe's conflict will be a straight up religio-race war.
America's will be more "intersectional." LOL
It'll also be about more fundamental, day-to-day matters, like whether you can go shopping without being hassled by a YouTube prankster, whether you can defend yourself in public, etc. One side will defend the rights of your tormenters, while the other side will insist on civil behavior.
I've since backed away from an insurgency as a scenario, so it's going to be interesting what form our conflict takes.
The French election results are a disappointment for the right only compared to expectations. The fact that Le Pen is even a possible victor would have been unthinkable a few years ago. A swing of just a few points would push her over. Political parties knocking on the door usually get to victory in the end.
There is a French meme “Nicolas, 30 ans” that shows a hard pressed young man being taxed on the one hand to support wealthy boomers and on the other hand the entitled migrant. The centre-right continues to exist in Europe with the support of smug boomers, but the young on the right see no point in them.
So far it’s mainly young males who have moved right. I wouldn’t be shocked to see the women follow at some point, although they tend to be slower to move than males.
There is a very bitter tone to today’s politics throughout the West, including Canada where I live. With an aging society, high government debt, stringent environmental policies, and high migration, the economy has become a zero sum game. Zero sum games are inherently bitter and high conflict.
The ultimate problem is that we can’t offer everything to everyone, and the policies of the left just make things worse. So you get disappointed expectations and a lot of finger pointing.
France lacks a male-female political divide. Young women supporting RN was definitely a head-scratcher for the Left. The UK also lacks a gender divide, though that's primarily due to the fact both young men and women lean left, far more than their USA counterparts. That all said, as long as women benefit from the status quo more than men, they'll be behind the curve compared to men.
I think we're at a point where young men and women are both noticing something is deeply wrong, but the same way leftists call 911 when something bad happens to them, they're seeking refuge in the establishment. This explains why sentiments are either entrenched on the left or at least not changing. I've had many arguments (mildly speaking) with people who think we're on the cusp of a major right-wing revolution or political realignment because information travels so much faster today, but people's minds don't change en masse in a few years. You can't argue that point, however, by mentioning trends, which are absolutely working against the Right. Then they resort to something lazy like, "It doesn't take many." Okay, but the U.S. has over 330 million. Even a few thousand isn't going to do much, unless they do something crazy like seize the White House. If your political movement relies on low-probably events occurring and their consequences working out in your favor, it's not much of a political movement.
What you said about bitter tone is a big reason why I think something like an economic crisis is likely to entrench existing beliefs rather than change minds. Changing your mind is a concession that you were wrong and most people don't like to admit they were wrong. Also, while cultural and social issues still have strong currency, people aren't going to vote for the other side if that means conceding on those issues.