Thursday, April 28, 2011


Laurent Fabius reportedly said that if 2012 comes down to a second-round choice between Le Pen and Sarkozy, he would vote Le Pen:

Après son intervention, il a dîné au Café Français avec la dizaine d'étudiants qui avaient préparé l'événement. Au cours du repas, il s'est livré à un petit questionnaire avec eux en leur demandant ce qu'ils feraient s'ils avaient à choisir au deuxième tour entre Nicolas Sarkozy et Marine Le Pen. Quelques étudiants ont répondu qu'ils voteraient Sarkozy, mais la plupart ont choisi l'abstention ou le vote blanc. Tout comme Laurent Fabius, d'ailleurs. « En 2002, j'ai voté Chirac même si je ne l'aimais pas. Mais, en 2012, je n'aime tellement pas Sarkozy ni sa politique qu'il me serait impossible de voter pour lui. »

I am reminded of why I so dislike Fabius. Can he be serious? Nothing that Sarkozy has done can to my mind justify such a position--and I am hardly Sarko's greatest fan. But look at Le Pen's positions: quit Europe, restore the franc, move to protectionism -- can Fabius really be willing to bear the costs of these things (even given his anti-EU past)? And that's to say nothing of Le Pen's positions on immigration and civil rights.

CORRECTION: As several commenters have noted, Fabius doesn't say he would vote for Le Pen; he says that he would abstain or vote blank. Sorry, I was reading to hastily. But I also find abstention incomprehensible and irresponsible.


meshplate said...

I agree completely with you, Art. There is no doubt that where Le Pen is out of bounds, Sarko still plays by some of the rules. But the desire to exaggerate and say things that are provocative is just as much of a French malady as an American one although the types of constituencies for it are often so different on opposite sides of the ocean. Fabius's public is supposedly well-educated and articulate, so there's really no excuse for this stupidity.

Le Chroniqueur Berliniquais said...

I was already completely bewildered, outraged and preparing to forward the article to all of my contacts with whom I usually discussed politics, but then, luckily, I took a closer look.

No, Fabius doesn't say that "he'd vote for Le Pen", he says that he would cast a blank ballot or would not turn out. Still quite bad, but seriously not nearly as bad as voting for Le Pen.

Now that we come to think of it, if he had said what you say he said, this would have caused massive outrage within the PS.

Sasha said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Won, Philippe et Raphael said...

i can understand Fabius point of view, a second round Lepen-Sarkozy, everybody know in this case Sarkozy will be elected.
But do people want him to be elected with 82% of the votes?
I dont think so, it will be a too much big gift for him.

FrédéricLN said...

I agree with Art… and disagree with Won, Philippe et Raphael.

First, even if we disagree with both of second-turn candidates, it's our duty to indicate which of them is "less worse" (moins pire) than the other one, if we can find one, of course.

Second, if people who wouldn't vote for Sarkozy on the first turn also wouldn't vote for him on the second turn, how could he be elected?

But I also share the opinion that we should try hard to avoid such an awful second turn.

Robert Marchenoir said...

What's in "Le Pen's position on civil rights" that you don't like ?

Did she promise to round up a few leftist professors and lock them up in order to teach them a lesson ? I don't think so, although it might be a swell idea now that I come to think of it.

Is it her promise to actually listen to what the French want (or do not want) regarding the immigration and crime issues, and act upon their will, meaning, ahem... restoring something which used to be called democracy ?

Is that the part of "civil rights" you don't like ? The part which says it's the French people who gets to decide, and not a bunch of politicians, journalists and left-wing "intellectuals", all parroting each other, and telling the people what's good for them ?

"Whether you like it or not", as they say, which must be one of the most fashionable catch-phrases in the French political and academic discourse nowadays, including and especially from the Left ? Which does not sound very civil-rightsy to me ? Which sounds downright totalitarian, actually ? Which is what the Left is all about anyway ?

Anonymous said...

J'espère de tout mon coeur que Sarkozy ne sera pas au deuxième tour ! Si nous y avions à choisir entre ces deux là, je voterai blanc pour la première fois de ma vie.


Anonymous said...

Art, Fabius' position is very, very common among people on the left. Sarkozy's policies really have inflamed them. Many felt betrayed after they "voted Chirac" in against their wishes in 2002 - they'd hoped Chirac would recognize he owes his re-election to their votes too and would have been more "open" to ideas from the left - and therefore don't want to repeat their "mistake". Some say that Sarkozy's playing the FN up because he knows a MLP/NS 2nd round is the only way he'll win, and they (voters) will refuse to fall into his trap.
In short... it may be scandalous but it's widely enough believed that there's a real danger in 2012.

Berlin Reader said...

Oi Robert Marchenoir, what are you exactly, the brainchild of Sarah Palin, Nick Griffin and Marine Le Pen all together or what?

"immigration and crime", oh yeah the old song again. Tell me, how many immigrants are caught laundering money, evading taxes, stealing corporate money, causing financial meltdowns due to their cheating, etc? Well, not that many, but for sure, just look the other way, report petty crime stories day after day after day in the press to keep the French busy with that, make sure a few UMP politicians use a tough anti-immigration stance as a "cache-sexe" for their blatant failures in fixing the country anyway, and you're sure to get as a result that "what the French want (or do not want)" is, well, what you seem to want quite badly.

Funny how just as we are talking, Charles Pasqua's won his appeal and all charges are now dropped against him. Yeah, that's the right for you: save your corporate pals' ars*s, keep stealing from everybody's purse, and make sure you blame all the country's problems on "immigrants". Yeah wonderful.

Anyway, I know better than to have a "debate" with right-wing trolls, I have already wasted too much time of my short life with that tedious activity.

You can't reason anyone out of something they haven't been reasoned into in the first place.

Robert Marchenoir said...

"How many immigrants are caught laundering money, evading taxes, etc"

Most of those who are in jail, which means the majority of inmates in most European countries, you Berlin leftist airhead !...

Laundering money and evading taxes is a major part of drug dealing, robbing, pimping, contraband and immigrant trafficking. Crimes which are committed disproportionately by immigrants.

Also occurring in France is a massive amount of fraud on social benefits, the resale of free prescription drugs on an industrial scale, etc. There again it's mostly immigrants at work.

That's financial crime, you marxist fool ! In the USSR, you used to be shot for that, because it meant stealing the state's property. It was called sabotage, and the bolsheviks did not take kindly to it.

So don't give me this old tired socialist canard of yours, that "real" crime is committed by the rich and goes unpunished, while "petty" crime is excusable because it's committed by the poor.

This "petty" crime you're talking about is murder and rape and assault and arson and drug dealing and robbery at gunpoint and home-jacking and torture.

That's not "petty" in the least. If you excuse this type of criminal, then you have a criminal mindset yourself.

Also, suggesting that because some type of crime is occurring another type of crime is excusable shows a sick mind, a perverted moral compass.

I don't know who you are, but you certainly look like a very dishonest individual.

What do you know about the sufferings of the French people in the hands of immigrant thugs, anyway, Mister Berlin leftist ?

Go sing your song about diversity to your fellow Germans, and let's see what they think of it -- that is, provided you're actually a German of German background.

Seems to me the Germans are getting pretty fed up as well by politically-correct lies such as yours, these days.

Arthur Goldhammer said...

I don't make a practice of removing comments from the site, but I won't tolerate personal invective. If the ad hominem attacks continue, I will remove them

Berlin reader said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Arthur Goldhammer said...

As promised, I removed Marchenoir's most recent comment because it continued the ad hominem attack on Berlin Reader. I apologize for the censorship. Please try to conduct your debates in a civil manner. I know that this is the Internet, but this particular corner of the Internet is not for streetfighting. Thank you.

Berlin Reader said...


I think it was my comment that got removed. I had simply replied to Mr Marchenoir and pointed to a few of the untruths contained in his message, the first of which being that I never said some crimes were "excusable". Considering that I have been mugged several times in Paris and London and held at gunpoint once, and would be pleased to see my aggressors pay for their crimes, therefore, implying that I had said that street violence and crime committed by immigrants or poor people is "excusable" was absolutely wrong and deceptive, and not any sort of logical conclusion. Petty crime is still crime. I also pointed out that I am a Frenchman, though one living in Berlin, and there was no reason to dismiss me as not "knowing about the sufferings of the French people in the hands of immigrant thugs", even if I find this rhetoric absolutely revolting.

I do not recall resorting to name-calling or ad hominem attacks, I even started my answer by "Hello Mr Marchenoir". I may have said what he wrote is "hateful xenophobic nonsense", but that's attacking what he wrote, not abusing him, and honestly this is displaying very civil behaviour after being called a "marxist fool" and a "Berlin leftist airhead".

It was a pleasure for me to read this blog over the recent months, but now I think it is best I unsubscribe from it.

Arthur Goldhammer said...

Yes, you're right, it was your post that was removed, not Marchenoir's. You wrote, for example: "OK I don't need to waste one more minute on your hateful drivel. You can't even read a text in plain English and react to what is actually written; to me that shows a pretty skewed capacity for logical analysis. If you need to invent things I never said in the first place to try to score points, really there's no point." I read that as a personal attack, and for the record, I stand closer to you on the substance than to Marchenoir. If you unsubscribe, I'll be sorry to lose you, but I think good manners are helpful in political discussions.