@@ToonStory-fh4gn Was pleasantly surprised to see the centrists and left parties cooperate by not competing against each other in the second round. I wish more people in my country would realize that maintaining our democracy and keeping the fascists from seizing control of our government has to be the only priority before we can worry about anything else.
During the Cold War, virtually all left-wing political parties _(socialist, communist, labor...)_ in Western European countries were co-opted by each country's secret services _(paramilitary structure or military intelligence)_ as a retroactive way to counter any Soviet kickbacks that were more than obvious. France is no different in this approach, as Melechon&Company and LePen&Company wouldn't be allowed to disrupt the core power(s) - rural & urban oligarchies _(Le Siecle etc...)_ - that make up the country, with 19th-20th century political slogans, promises, soundbites and projects. For example, the IEA, OPEC, and NOCs would be very punishing with France and its resource needs such as oil and gas with such statements, as you said, regarding Arabs, Jews, or even gays.
Moreover, I see the DGSI, DGSE, DRSD, SCRT, and DRM to be heavily active with their people inside these political parties - both in the background and at the negotiations table between themselves.
@@Trexmaster12 There were deep cover operatives within the more dangerous factions, informants. To say the current Left parties will just do whatever the establishment tells them--not credible. They were worried about a government controlled by LePen, and they were not giving up any seats they were likely to win. Neither were the centrists. And how come this doesn't happen in other countries in Western Europe that have far-right parties? Liberal France has feared a LePen government for decades. It keeps looming closer. So they keep finding ways to head it off. The simplest explanation is best, and to say "They were orderd to stand down by shadowy forces and nobody blabbed" is not a simple explanation.
I dont what to say. I guess those in power make it so confusing for the benefit of themselves, not for the people. Same where i live but here in the usa with more people it eventually gets exposed. Look at Canada has a dictator and nobody bats an eye.
Thank you, I loved hearing a French point of view. I find the best political discussions come from those who "don't like discussing politics." When times are tough and things are not perceived to be going well, three phenomena usually happen: 1. People move away from moderation and more toward both extremes, left and right. 2. People start viewing everyone on the other side of politics as absolute evil rather than just folks they disagree with. 3. Voters start drifting toward whoever is currently NOT in power. If conservatives are in power, they vote liberal, and vice-versa. We are seeing this all over the world and have seen it throughout history. Not particular to any one place or time.
Excellent! I love this explanation, it's exactly what's happening. France is going through very serious difficulties, and France is polarising and rejecting the current government en masse for different reasons. And all this is leading to an unhealthy game that is dividing us at a time when we need unity and goodwill between us in such a complicated world.
Hard to understand the differences in party's because when I read their political positions they are all FAR left of most of ours. NONE would be considered moderate in the USA. Macron's party would be to the left of our hard left Democrat party. Frances "Rspublicans" ARE way to the left of the Republicans in the USA
I understand, and that may also be the case for a lot of different european parties? Our political system, culture are quite different and personnally I find it very interesting to study and learn about these differences. Thanks
Thank you from a Brit for your explanation of this important political situation. It isn't just the French who dislike Macron either, he's no friend of the UK so it's good to know that this silly little man isn't getting things his own way any more. That said, we have our own political sh#t show going on over here. Incompetence rules in Westminster, stuff the lot of them. Cheers Frenchie. 👍
The illusion of choice is a technique where people's control and restriction within certain limits are maintained by forcing them to choose a particular thing from several seemingly different versions (while making it impossible to use things of an opposite nature). People can only choose from the options presented to them (by us) regarding the given thing, without having the ability to use other options, without realizing that we are the ones who determine what is allowed and take away what we do not permit.
It reminds me of a South Park season in 2017 were they have the choice during the elections between a turd sandwich and an enema bulb if I'm not mistaken?
This is exactly right. "Seemingly different" while both choices are part of the same group behind the scenes. They win either way. The only difference is which breadcrumbs they feed us to keep the appearance of being different.
Thank you for this explanation, the election was actually covered here in the states quite closely but it was confusing to many of us because we didn't understand having more than one round, this explains alot. As we Americans approach our own big elections this fall I'm hoping we get our act together, it's been interesting here to say the very least!😊. Thank you as always for the video and thoughtful commentary, and congrats on the speed this channel is growing, remember, don't forget us little people when you get to be the big UA-cam star😊. Happy weekend everyone
Thank you, yes I understand these elections were not really easy to understand and quite confusing as the situation here is very very confused 😅 Have a nice weekend!
I use to think Macron was generally respected in France until these past 4 years. Its been interesting seeing all the events unfold over recent months in all these elections
I discovered him in 2017 and I first saw him as someone who didn't come from the political mainstream, as someone modern who could bring a breath of fresh air that our country needs. It's impressive to see how he destroyed all of that
@@ToonStory-fh4gn “The throne may look omnipotent from afar but - take the throne to act and the throne acts upon you.” The quote comes from CGP Grey's _[The] Rules for Rulers_ video but I do *not* recommend you watch it for now, since it may demoralize you more than how you are right now with your thoughts & state of mind.
Unfortunately, it is predictable that, when a country faces the large scale influx of migrants that form a non-assimilating bloc, both that A) Members of the majority culture (including extremists) will push back in one direction, and B) Minorities (including both radicals and those who have already assimilated long ago) will feel insecure and push the other direction. Political opportunists will also strike, taking advantage of the situation to advance their ideological positions and political careers. It is not *good* , or an excuse, but it is also not surprising nor should it be unexpected. The main concern, then, is to not intoduce a massive influx of migrants from a non-assimilating cultural millieu in a short time. Then, the more racist elements have no obvious scapegoat to rally and fearmonger against and continue to squirm in obscurity, and Leftist radicals have no convenient vehicle to attempt to force radical change. However, at the moment, France has far right, far left, and Islamic Fundamentalist radicals pulling in all directions. Saying that France Unbound isn't "far left" but the "National Rally" *is* "far right" seems biased and unrealistic. What policies or ideological positions specifically *would* define a party as "far left," in your opinion? It seems to me from the outside that the leading edges of *both* are extreme and are leading parties behind them whose voters are acting based on fear and reasonable concern rather than a hard, extremist, ideology. I hope that violence is avoided and this result is actually good for France. A major problem with the Macron coalition seemed to be that it was insulated from the people and acted in ways not representative of the will of those they were supposed to represent. It was an artificial, convenient, but not very representative political leadership who thought they knew best what needed to be done. Now, at least, we have a more diverse and hopefully locally-responsive political landscape. Let me intrude some American political theory for a moment. The classic American ideal is the Limited Government. We only have two parties primarily because it always assures that there is a powerful restraining force no matter who or what measure is involved. It is *not* the ideal of government to be able to do things easily, unopposed, and without compromise or likely failure. It *is* the ideal of government that its members be as responsive and responsible as possible to their constituents. The realistic success of the second point pretty much guarantees the failure of the first. Political parties in government making things happen is *supposed* to be difficult and restrained by the presence of strong opposition. Gridlock is a feature, not a bug. You said it yourself. Macron was able to simply force whatever measure he wanted into being. That's because he didn't have democratic standing to do so, but an artificial conglomeration of convenient alliances which encouraged mps to vote according to Macron's direction rather than their own representative duty and formed a bloc which shut out everyone else. This is, to me, the weakness of multi-party parlimentarian systems compared to a two-party congress. The group in majority is, itself, not an organic whole, but an alliance of convenience which must then act with further dissimulation in regards to the remaining opposing parties. This just adds yet another layer of seperation between the votes of the people and the actions of their government. In the US, an action is put forward by the party in majority, they need to try to ensure they get enough of their own people behind it as possible (which isn't exactly guaranteed) in order to overcome the hurdle of however many of the opposing party they can expect to stand against it. If they can manage that, then they succeed. Period. People are put into office based on what the people want out of them. Either they have enough like-minded representatives of the people, or they don't. Some compromise will be necessary, but that's pretty much it. Should we do X? Yes or No. In Parlimentary systems, you have situations such as in Canada where the leader of the third most numerous party basically goes along with whatever the PM of the Liberal Party says (thus being derelict of duty towards those who elected him based on his particular party platform) in exchange for staying in power. Theoretically, PM Trudaeu needs his votes, but realistically Singh of the NDP knows that opposing Trudaeu would just put the Conservatives in power. So, he basically just hands the Liberal Party his own party's votes and the entire party basically doesn't exist as anything but a subserviant wing if the Liberal Party. What about the NDP voter from Singh's district who voted for NDP, not the Liberal Party? Oh well, the politicians know better. What's wrong with just putting people in a room based on who their constituents choose, and having them vote on things? Wouldn't that be the ideal? But the Parlimentary system requires the Parliment rather than the general populace directly to "form a government." Thus, the wrestling for majorities, coalitions, and strategic dropping of races. On the face of it, ideology aside, two parties working together in a second round of elections to keep out a third by pulling out of strategic races is directly anti-democratic. How about give every constituency the full range of options based on who has stood up in each. Imagine being pro Party B, but because of a suprisingly good showing by Party C, your own party decides that you don't get to vote for the party of your choice, but *must* vote for A or C. They are limiting the electoral voice of their own supporters to spite their opposition. They should make it so that everyone who moved forward from the first round has to stand for the second. You can't change the options on the French people in the middle of the process because you don't like how they're voting. Can a French person please explain to me the purpose of the Two-Round system? It seems like the best thing is simply to give each constituency the full options to select from and then honor that choice instead of then coming back and saying, "no, who do you really want?" I can guess that maybe it is to make sure that every mp in the parliment represents a majority, but it doesn't really do that. If Jean Blanc gets 46% of the vote in his constituency, then the choice is changed and he then gets 53%, he *still* only represents the preference of 46% of his constituents, because the second "survey" was skewed artificially. He represents 53% of the voters *after their options have been restricted* , but actually only 46% of his the voters' actual preference, which is what we are supposed to be counting, right? In a two-party scenario, whoever wins automatically represents a majority of votes. This just seems like yet another barrier to responsive and direct representation, along with the multi-party coalition system.
I think in the forthcoming weeks I'll do a full video on the topic of Immigration in France, because it is a very complex topic, with a lot of myths, and I feel like it deserves to really be explored
@ToonStory-fh4gn , Fair enough. That would be great to see. I am as far from an expert as one can be. I do know that France has had a relatively diverse population and from relatively early compared to Western Europe in general, thanks partly to the citizenship afforded to certain of its overseas possessions and Napoleonic ideals. Yet, it seems that the country is struggling to deal with the implications of fast, large-scale immigration from poor Islamic countries in recent years as are other European countries. That is my perception and the limit of what I know. So, more information and/or correction is very welcome. I know this may not be the kind of content you *want* to make, but I think it is quite worthwhile.
The reason why right leaning parties are rising is because left leaning parties are ignoring the general concerns of the regular citizens. Whereas the right are willing to listen. Which is why they are only going to gain more popularity in the future. Left leaning people usually jump to calling people 'racist' without listening to their concerns which only alienates people. It is important not to bury your head in the sand when things like the Charlie Hebdo attacks happened (I personally think their cartoons are bad & their art is poor but I support their right to freedom of speech/expression.) The left leaning people are supporting minorities who are deeply entrenched in Islam and think they can do no wrong because of their skin colour which is purely incorrect. I'm not French, i'm English so I don't have a deep understanding of your politics because of the language barrier but this is what I see as an outsider looking in.
Thank you for your perspective, it's very insightful. This is the way I feel about it: Charlie Hebdo, and the Paris attacks, were petty criminals, too damned stupid to understand anything about religion, but who were recruited and brainwashed by ISIS because they were completely marginal. And I have every reason to hate them because I was a Parisian, I lived in these neighbourhoods that were attacked, I knew some victims and it was a trauma. From my point of view, it's crime and the fact that the state has deserted certain poor neighbourhoods for decades that need to be tackled. We need to give back resources to the police, educators, schools, associations, health services, and so on. On the far right, I would say that they have a double discourse: populist, on purchasing power, etc. in France but in Europe they have voted for the most neo-liberal measures possible. They are backed by billionaires and their programme will benefit the wealthiest 10% of the population.
@@ToonStory-fh4gn You're welcome! I have a reaction requests for you: Can you please react to Kings and Generals' video about the Great Siege of Gibraltar? I'm from the UK but I live in the south of Spain very close to Gibraltar. It would be cool to see you react to some local history (from my perspective)
Unless you're moderate or independent, and pick sides depending on the issue. You have more effect at the local level, picking judges and aldermen etc. But the presidential election is always simply Slightly Left or Slightly Right in the US. And it needs to head back to Right, this economy sucks LOL.
The problem with a two party system is that it creates polarization. The problem with a multi party system is that sometimes you can't even form a government. The problem with a one party system is it eventually becomes tyrannical. The problem with politics is people.
@@Marcus-p5i5s What an adorable spring child you are. The US government is run by corporations with dumptrucks of cash that can and do buy everyone they need to.
I'm just willing to accept that money is the only true power in the world because I've seen it at work. The owner of the company I work for was caught by law enforcement at the airport where his private plane was found to contain a few dozen kilos of a certain illegal white powder. He never spent a single second in jail and didn't go to court at all. He slipped enough cash into pockets that his crime and the media coverage of it just went away. And he's a small fry in the grand scheme of things.
Interesting to hear you talk about this. It's going to be pretty sketchy in the West for the next few years and what happens in France obviously matters. But I don't think it'll be any different from what is happening elsewhere. The issues are shared and obvious.
My only question I have on the whole situation is this.. is the “far right” actually far right? Are they actually sexist and racist? We have a problem here in the states with the media and left wing politicians claiming anyone who isn’t a democrat of being these things when they clearly aren’t true, and they just use these claims to shut down debates when they start to lose. Racist, sexist, fascist, have all been watered down and lost their true meaning because these words are used so loosely, if you know what I mean?
My point is racism and sexism is actually pretty rare in the states these days but the media and left wing would have you believe it’s a much bigger deal than it really is. Sounds pretty crazy that a prominent political group in France would encourage these horrible beliefs.
Here is my answer, and it reflects only my opinion: The RN has very close ties with antisemitic, negationnists, supremacists and racist movements. They want to create discrimination between French citizens and abolish the droit du sol, which has existed since the Ancien Régime and in in breach of Article 1 of our constitution : "France is an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It ensures the equality of all citizens before the law, regardless of origin, race or religion." The sexist part is linked to their pro-birth policy, which is said to encourage women to confine themselves to the role of housewife. They are, of course, opposed to abortion and in Europe have refused to vote for rights to support the fight against violence against women. + If I look at the number of MPs who have been convicted of inciting hatred, it's chilling. I hope this brought to you some insights. Of course, as I said it is only my answer and I am no political expert.
That feeling of not knowing if you belong or not is so reminiscent of after the Mexican American war and even more recently during the world wars where America was making up the lack of manpower by basically opening up the southern border. There are countless stories of of Mexican Americans born and raised in America suddenly automatically being labeled mexicans, with all of the racist language to go with it. When I learned about that I gained so much more respect for not just Mexican Americans but to the culture as a whole.
Thanks for the historical parralel. It must be so hard to somehow lose your identity and being rejected by both Americans & Mexicans because you're kind of in the middle
@@ToonStory-fh4gn Let me enlighten you. Not one single US citizen gives a rats ass about France. You are not that important. The USA will do whatever the f...k it wants no matter who's in charge , you arrogant pos.
@ToonStory-fh4gn someone just tried to kill Donald Trump at a rally. He was winged in the ear and someone standing behind him was hurt badly. I think this is just what we were talking about.
Your honest assessments are appreciated. This subject caught my attention a while back when I saw a young man there sporting the Che Guevara look and many other young folks projecting unbridled (let's call it anger.) The Che thing is very familiar to me. What I believe is going on comes down to only two ideologies: globalism vs nationalism and it's a worldwide push, not just France. Other labels like right, left, socialism, communism, etc. are immaterial at this point.
Yes thank you. The globalism vs nationalism is quite strong indeed, plus a civilisational dimension. also have the feeling that we live in an extremely polarised and divided world, which also kills any form of dialogue and makes it almost immediate to resort to conflict and the rejection of any form of otherness.
I don't see how anyone missed this result as soon as the Centre and Left combined forces to drop candidates so moderates and left votes went to whichever candidate was left of the 2 groupings. The system is designed to stop extremes as soon as Parties collude to drop candidates. I just don't think Macron (or anyone else) expected the left to do as well (surprising as the Left is always well organised).
Frankly, when I saw that the left was getting organised, I thought I was high. Macron played a bizarre role, playing on the fear of the two competing parties, and he threw fuel on the fire. Even today, his game is very murky. In short, we're not out of trouble yet!
As an American, French democracy, actually most European style politics, seems so strange to me. The way parliaments can be dissolved. Random elections can be called. Multiple rounds of voting almost like a sports tournament bracket. The way political parties just pop up in the middle of voting. The way y’all protest and riot constantly and the cops seemingly don’t care. The way tractors sprayed manure through downtown Paris and on the police and they didn’t do anything. None of that happens in the US. I guess it can be attributed to us both being Republics formed under different styles of democracies. France is absolutely fascinating. Y’all took the cue from Americans after the Revolutionary War and just RAN wild with it.
Europeans also don’t like our style of politics either, like how the popular vote doesn’t automatically guarantee who’s president, only the electoral college vote does that, which is fucking stupid because what’s the point in voting if your vote doesn’t even matter?
I understand that European politics, and even more so those of France, are a bit hard to understand for you in the US. Even I wasn't sure I understood these elections. The police are quite violent during demonstrations and dozens of people have been seriously injured and crippled as a result of marches that have been supposed to be peaceful for years, and especially since Macron came to power. It's a symbol of our increasingly violent society and political life. And the tractor stuff was just drunk farmors wanting to have a bit of fun! All the best from France :)
It's not that we don't like it, it's that it's very different from our system and that having a federal state is a strange concept for many French people who live in a highly centralised country.
You're right, my vocabulary lacks nuance here my bad. Compromise is indeed what makes politics healthy, but I was more referring to a blighted situation where all the currents were going to neutralise each other and prevent any coherent policy. Thank you for challenging me on this point!
You know, ignoring who was on the tickets for a moment, I don't understand how the French and British can put up with a system that can produce such a disconnect between the seat distribution and the popular vote. Then again here in Germany the system tries to combine direct proportional voting with regional representation which leads to a ballooning Bundestag.
Probably why our political class is so disconnected from their people, and so out of touch with reality. No political system is perfect but ours is in serious need of "rethinking". Thank you!
If one could turn the clock back to just a few decades ago, Marine Le Pen's message would be considered moderate common sense, to save the French identity, be patriotic and require immigrants to assimilate. Today Charles De Gaul is considered far right, no? Just because her father is accused of ties with fascism doesn't make her or her party guilty of it imo. Radicalism whether left or right is not good for anyone.
Today De Gaulles is considered as a traditional right figure, and Gaullism is fondamentally opposed to Petain who's an influential figure in the Rassemblement National. Le Pen has worked on her image to make her party look much smoother, but basically it remains a far-right party as judged by our Institutional Council. I agree that Patriotism, French Culture and helping the immigrants to assimilate and properly integrate our country are common sense but it goes much further than that in his party. Don't hesitate to let me know if you want me to elaborate on this, thanks for your comment!
@@ToonStory-fh4gn I would absolutely like it if you wish to elaborate on this more because I believe I understand French history better than the average American and I am def interested in learning more because what I know of French politics is only a drop in the bucket. Others likewise can learn more. I can determine from seeing only a few of your videos that you take a calm, common sense approach to things and above all keep a cool head over controversy and criticism in your explanations.
Well first Vive le France as always. As an American I'm happy to be a full throated supporter of all our friends in Europe. Did I understand you correctly that you are in general a supporter of Jean-Luc Mélenchon? I support your nation electing whoever you want but I have heard a lot of this man that makes me wary of him. If I'm wrong about him can you point me to better information about him?
Thank you for your time! I'm not a Mélenchon supporter, but I have to admit that he amuses me. He's an excellent speaker, and a man who fights fiercely for his ideas so I'd love to see him go and kick Macron's arse as Prime Minister. That and even though I think we need reforms, Mélenchon is too divisive and we also need appeasement... It's going to be complicated!
Very interesting and informative. Unfortunately we seem to be living in extremist times - something which (it seems to me) has been steadily building since the financial collapse in 2008 and I include both the extreme left and right. I'm getting on in years now and I have never known the UK to be so polarized, as it is now, since the 1980s under Thatcher. The Centre ground seems to have disappeared and no one seems prepared to listen to anyone else's point of view. I like the Internet as a means of sharing views but it seems to be so easy to either indoctrinate people or enrage them. This has contributed to a 'Cancel Culture' where legitimate criticism and disagreement are dismissed as 'hate' and are not tolerated.
Yes, I've been voting for 20 years and for 20 years I've seen the discourse become poorer and more radical, at the same time as the divisions between the parties have widened. And for a very long time I've had the impression that our politicians are totally disconnected from our problems, at least in my opinion. That's why I prefer History, I guess... Thank you, all my friendship from accross the pond!
@@ToonStory-fh4gn talking of history- I recently watched an excellent documentary series on the 100 years war. i was hoping to send you a link but I don't seem to be able to do that. Entitled 'Chivalry and betrayal' in 3 parts presented by Dr Nina Ramirez. it is available to watch online - maybe you could feature it on your channel - I'd be very interested in your perspective.
What are your impressions regarding these elections? I'll admit I'm high, so maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear much about what you think? Honestly I expected something from you, not a reaction. Still, I'm learning quite a bit that I wasn't taught, so thank you. Assurer? Scary times, the US is bonkers right now.
Well done for going through your countries system, I feel I have a little more idea about what’s going on. I’m English and our voting system is in need of change. I do understand your fears for the future, is this a general thing that affects the entire of Europe I wonder.
Oh! Excellent question, glad you asked. Because they are unable to set aside their egos for one minute to agree that overall they have the same values and maybe their priority should be to try unite and to seize the power in order to re-shift the balance and create a more interesting political dynamic but no that's funnier to remain divided
They had a chance and they were beaten, thank God. Since when have Nazis triggered positive reforms. We all know what they want. They want what Trump wants, what Putin wants.
Okay, here's how I feel, and simply how I feel about it: My country is in vital need for reform, and something new. Throughout the campaign I saw the intellectual poverty of their representatives, their inability to put a figure on the slightest measure, their lack of understanding of fundamental topics... BUT political experts and scholars have calculated that the far right would need 18 months to demolish the rule of law in France and do pretty much as they please. As a history buff, I can see very much how they could replicate what happened in Germany in 1933.
@@ToonStory-fh4gn yeah look I mean there can be comparisons made in that regard for these situations, but keep in mind that our modern world now is quite different from how it was in the 1930s. It’s a very interconnected society in our globe. If a country like France or Italy for that matter were to start behaving the same way as the Third Reich, there would be a swift international reaction involving economic sanctions and trade embargoes which would completely crush the nations in question. That’s why someone like Marine Le Pen has opposed Holocaust denial and also deporting non white citizens of France.
Interesting video my friend. Don't get me started on politics,being Scottish were ruled by English labour,or English Torres,either way Scotland loses,the English torries,shut down our coal mines,steel works,an moved them to England to get votes,cause the Scott's don't vote for torries,that was Maggie thatcher the most hated prime minister in Scotland,we celebrated her death in Scotland. Anyway until the politicians start answering the questions there asked or tell the truth,I'm not interested in what they say.
Thanks bro. Politics = bad news, period. The only politician who has excited me a little since I don't know when was Macron at the very beginning, who seemed a little different from the others and who exploded the traditional balance of our parties. Well, we've been ripped off like rookies.
What are your impressions regarding these elections?
@@ToonStory-fh4gn Was pleasantly surprised to see the centrists and left parties cooperate by not competing against each other in the second round. I wish more people in my country would realize that maintaining our democracy and keeping the fascists from seizing control of our government has to be the only priority before we can worry about anything else.
During the Cold War, virtually all left-wing political parties _(socialist, communist, labor...)_ in Western European countries were co-opted by each country's secret services _(paramilitary structure or military intelligence)_ as a retroactive way to counter any Soviet kickbacks that were more than obvious.
France is no different in this approach, as Melechon&Company and LePen&Company wouldn't be allowed to disrupt the core power(s) - rural & urban oligarchies _(Le Siecle etc...)_ - that make up the country, with 19th-20th century political slogans, promises, soundbites and projects. For example, the IEA, OPEC, and NOCs would be very punishing with France and its resource needs such as oil and gas with such statements, as you said, regarding Arabs, Jews, or even gays.
Moreover, I see the DGSI, DGSE, DRSD, SCRT, and DRM to be heavily active with their people inside these political parties - both in the background and at the negotiations table between themselves.
@@Trexmaster12 There were deep cover operatives within the more dangerous factions, informants. To say the current Left parties will just do whatever the establishment tells them--not credible.
They were worried about a government controlled by LePen, and they were not giving up any seats they were likely to win. Neither were the centrists.
And how come this doesn't happen in other countries in Western Europe that have far-right parties?
Liberal France has feared a LePen government for decades. It keeps looming closer. So they keep finding ways to head it off.
The simplest explanation is best, and to say "They were orderd to stand down by shadowy forces and nobody blabbed" is not a simple explanation.
I dont what to say. I guess those in power make it so confusing for the benefit of themselves, not for the people. Same where i live but here in the usa with more people it eventually gets exposed. Look at Canada has a dictator and nobody bats an eye.
@@ToonStory-fh4gn im old. Young people are going to destroy this earth and blame it on us old people to feel good about themselves.
Thank you, I loved hearing a French point of view. I find the best political discussions come from those who "don't like discussing politics."
When times are tough and things are not perceived to be going well, three phenomena usually happen:
1. People move away from moderation and more toward both extremes, left and right.
2. People start viewing everyone on the other side of politics as absolute evil rather than just folks they disagree with.
3. Voters start drifting toward whoever is currently NOT in power. If conservatives are in power, they vote liberal, and vice-versa.
We are seeing this all over the world and have seen it throughout history. Not particular to any one place or time.
Excellent! I love this explanation, it's exactly what's happening. France is going through very serious difficulties, and France is polarising and rejecting the current government en masse for different reasons. And all this is leading to an unhealthy game that is dividing us at a time when we need unity and goodwill between us in such a complicated world.
The problem is that even if you don't want to be involved with politics, politics will - sooner or later - be very involved with you.
Very well said
This helped a lot, we’ve been following everything here from the US daily but there was a lot more confusion.
Yes I understand, the situation was pretty confused here too... Glad this helped!
who the f...k from the US is following daily. Nobody here in the US gives a rats ass what France is doing. Who the hell is France.
Was hoping you did a video on this because I really wanted an intelligent, French explanation of the situation.
Thank you, I understand the situation was very confusing even for me... I'll try to do more videos on the current situation in France!
This was very interesting. I've been following this on and off from the UK and was a little lost on what it all meant.
I was lost too, and I probably still am 😅
Hard to understand the differences in party's because when I read their political positions they are all FAR left of most of ours. NONE would be considered moderate in the USA. Macron's party would be to the left of our hard left Democrat party. Frances "Rspublicans" ARE way to the left of the Republicans in the USA
I understand, and that may also be the case for a lot of different european parties? Our political system, culture are quite different and personnally I find it very interesting to study and learn about these differences. Thanks
Thanks for the breakdown of the parties. I've been seeing your election in the news and was confused about the whole thing.
Thanks, I understand even for us it was very confusing and it still is
Thank you from a Brit for your explanation of this important political situation. It isn't just the French who dislike Macron either, he's no friend of the UK so it's good to know that this silly little man isn't getting things his own way any more. That said, we have our own political sh#t show going on over here. Incompetence rules in Westminster, stuff the lot of them. Cheers Frenchie. 👍
Thank you, the analysis of his advisers is that he is too intelligent for France. That's real news. Yup.
You should have a look at the way Australia does it, so much easier and more representative.
Thanks, it sounds interesting!
The illusion of choice is a technique where people's control and restriction within certain limits are maintained by forcing them to choose a particular thing from several seemingly different versions (while making it impossible to use things of an opposite nature). People can only choose from the options presented to them (by us) regarding the given thing, without having the ability to use other options, without realizing that we are the ones who determine what is allowed and take away what we do not permit.
It reminds me of a South Park season in 2017 were they have the choice during the elections between a turd sandwich and an enema bulb if I'm not mistaken?
@@ToonStory-fh4gn Maybe, I don't know, but it's still fun :)
@@ToonStory-fh4gn It was an election between a Turd Sandwich and a Giant Douche.
This is exactly right. "Seemingly different" while both choices are part of the same group behind the scenes. They win either way. The only difference is which breadcrumbs they feed us to keep the appearance of being different.
@@ToonStory-fh4gn It was a Turd Sandwich and a Giant Douche. Not sure why they deleted my comment earlier...
This has been your best video in weeks Frenchy
Thanks mate
thanks, nice insights for les rostbeefs
🫡
Thank you for this explanation, the election was actually covered here in the states quite closely but it was confusing to many of us because we didn't understand having more than one round, this explains alot. As we Americans approach our own big elections this fall I'm hoping we get our act together, it's been interesting here to say the very least!😊. Thank you as always for the video and thoughtful commentary, and congrats on the speed this channel is growing, remember, don't forget us little people when you get to be the big UA-cam star😊. Happy weekend everyone
Thank you, yes I understand these elections were not really easy to understand and quite confusing as the situation here is very very confused 😅 Have a nice weekend!
"our act together"? Our elections always come off without major problems.
@@Marcus-p5i5s Occasionally there's bitching about who won (2000, 2020), but yeah, for the most part it's all done in 1 night and it's fine.
Thanks for the video.
Thank you!
Diolch yn fawr, Mon ami. Great to hear an actual educated, unbiased, French persons reaction to this subject
Thank you very my friend, all my friendship from France :)
I use to think Macron was generally respected in France until these past 4 years. Its been interesting seeing all the events unfold over recent months in all these elections
I discovered him in 2017 and I first saw him as someone who didn't come from the political mainstream, as someone modern who could bring a breath of fresh air that our country needs. It's impressive to see how he destroyed all of that
@@ToonStory-fh4gn
“The throne may look omnipotent from afar but - take the throne to act and the throne acts upon you.”
The quote comes from CGP Grey's _[The] Rules for Rulers_ video but I do *not* recommend you watch it for now, since it may demoralize you more than how you are right now with your thoughts & state of mind.
Unfortunately, it is predictable that, when a country faces the large scale influx of migrants that form a non-assimilating bloc, both that A) Members of the majority culture (including extremists) will push back in one direction, and B) Minorities (including both radicals and those who have already assimilated long ago) will feel insecure and push the other direction. Political opportunists will also strike, taking advantage of the situation to advance their ideological positions and political careers.
It is not *good* , or an excuse, but it is also not surprising nor should it be unexpected.
The main concern, then, is to not intoduce a massive influx of migrants from a non-assimilating cultural millieu in a short time. Then, the more racist elements have no obvious scapegoat to rally and fearmonger against and continue to squirm in obscurity, and Leftist radicals have no convenient vehicle to attempt to force radical change.
However, at the moment, France has far right, far left, and Islamic Fundamentalist radicals pulling in all directions.
Saying that France Unbound isn't "far left" but the "National Rally" *is* "far right" seems biased and unrealistic. What policies or ideological positions specifically *would* define a party as "far left," in your opinion?
It seems to me from the outside that the leading edges of *both* are extreme and are leading parties behind them whose voters are acting based on fear and reasonable concern rather than a hard, extremist, ideology.
I hope that violence is avoided and this result is actually good for France. A major problem with the Macron coalition seemed to be that it was insulated from the people and acted in ways not representative of the will of those they were supposed to represent. It was an artificial, convenient, but not very representative political leadership who thought they knew best what needed to be done. Now, at least, we have a more diverse and hopefully locally-responsive political landscape.
Let me intrude some American political theory for a moment. The classic American ideal is the Limited Government. We only have two parties primarily because it always assures that there is a powerful restraining force no matter who or what measure is involved. It is *not* the ideal of government to be able to do things easily, unopposed, and without compromise or likely failure. It *is* the ideal of government that its members be as responsive and responsible as possible to their constituents. The realistic success of the second point pretty much guarantees the failure of the first. Political parties in government making things happen is *supposed* to be difficult and restrained by the presence of strong opposition. Gridlock is a feature, not a bug.
You said it yourself. Macron was able to simply force whatever measure he wanted into being. That's because he didn't have democratic standing to do so, but an artificial conglomeration of convenient alliances which encouraged mps to vote according to Macron's direction rather than their own representative duty and formed a bloc which shut out everyone else.
This is, to me, the weakness of multi-party parlimentarian systems compared to a two-party congress. The group in majority is, itself, not an organic whole, but an alliance of convenience which must then act with further dissimulation in regards to the remaining opposing parties. This just adds yet another layer of seperation between the votes of the people and the actions of their government.
In the US, an action is put forward by the party in majority, they need to try to ensure they get enough of their own people behind it as possible (which isn't exactly guaranteed) in order to overcome the hurdle of however many of the opposing party they can expect to stand against it. If they can manage that, then they succeed. Period.
People are put into office based on what the people want out of them. Either they have enough like-minded representatives of the people, or they don't. Some compromise will be necessary, but that's pretty much it. Should we do X? Yes or No.
In Parlimentary systems, you have situations such as in Canada where the leader of the third most numerous party basically goes along with whatever the PM of the Liberal Party says (thus being derelict of duty towards those who elected him based on his particular party platform) in exchange for staying in power. Theoretically, PM Trudaeu needs his votes, but realistically Singh of the NDP knows that opposing Trudaeu would just put the Conservatives in power. So, he basically just hands the Liberal Party his own party's votes and the entire party basically doesn't exist as anything but a subserviant wing if the Liberal Party. What about the NDP voter from Singh's district who voted for NDP, not the Liberal Party? Oh well, the politicians know better.
What's wrong with just putting people in a room based on who their constituents choose, and having them vote on things? Wouldn't that be the ideal? But the Parlimentary system requires the Parliment rather than the general populace directly to "form a government." Thus, the wrestling for majorities, coalitions, and strategic dropping of races.
On the face of it, ideology aside, two parties working together in a second round of elections to keep out a third by pulling out of strategic races is directly anti-democratic. How about give every constituency the full range of options based on who has stood up in each. Imagine being pro Party B, but because of a suprisingly good showing by Party C, your own party decides that you don't get to vote for the party of your choice, but *must* vote for A or C. They are limiting the electoral voice of their own supporters to spite their opposition. They should make it so that everyone who moved forward from the first round has to stand for the second. You can't change the options on the French people in the middle of the process because you don't like how they're voting.
Can a French person please explain to me the purpose of the Two-Round system? It seems like the best thing is simply to give each constituency the full options to select from and then honor that choice instead of then coming back and saying, "no, who do you really want?"
I can guess that maybe it is to make sure that every mp in the parliment represents a majority, but it doesn't really do that. If Jean Blanc gets 46% of the vote in his constituency, then the choice is changed and he then gets 53%, he *still* only represents the preference of 46% of his constituents, because the second "survey" was skewed artificially. He represents 53% of the voters *after their options have been restricted* , but actually only 46% of his the voters' actual preference, which is what we are supposed to be counting, right? In a two-party scenario, whoever wins automatically represents a majority of votes.
This just seems like yet another barrier to responsive and direct representation, along with the multi-party coalition system.
I think in the forthcoming weeks I'll do a full video on the topic of Immigration in France, because it is a very complex topic, with a lot of myths, and I feel like it deserves to really be explored
@ToonStory-fh4gn ,
Fair enough. That would be great to see. I am as far from an expert as one can be. I do know that France has had a relatively diverse population and from relatively early compared to Western Europe in general, thanks partly to the citizenship afforded to certain of its overseas possessions and Napoleonic ideals. Yet, it seems that the country is struggling to deal with the implications of fast, large-scale immigration from poor Islamic countries in recent years as are other European countries.
That is my perception and the limit of what I know. So, more information and/or correction is very welcome.
I know this may not be the kind of content you *want* to make, but I think it is quite worthwhile.
The reason why right leaning parties are rising is because left leaning parties are ignoring the general concerns of the regular citizens.
Whereas the right are willing to listen. Which is why they are only going to gain more popularity in the future.
Left leaning people usually jump to calling people 'racist' without listening to their concerns which only alienates people.
It is important not to bury your head in the sand when things like the Charlie Hebdo attacks happened (I personally think their cartoons are bad & their art is poor but I support their right to freedom of speech/expression.) The left leaning people are supporting minorities who are deeply entrenched in Islam and think they can do no wrong because of their skin colour which is purely incorrect.
I'm not French, i'm English so I don't have a deep understanding of your politics because of the language barrier but this is what I see as an outsider looking in.
Thank you for your perspective, it's very insightful. This is the way I feel about it:
Charlie Hebdo, and the Paris attacks, were petty criminals, too damned stupid to understand anything about religion, but who were recruited and brainwashed by ISIS because they were completely marginal. And I have every reason to hate them because I was a Parisian, I lived in these neighbourhoods that were attacked, I knew some victims and it was a trauma. From my point of view, it's crime and the fact that the state has deserted certain poor neighbourhoods for decades that need to be tackled. We need to give back resources to the police, educators, schools, associations, health services, and so on.
On the far right, I would say that they have a double discourse: populist, on purchasing power, etc. in France but in Europe they have voted for the most neo-liberal measures possible. They are backed by billionaires and their programme will benefit the wealthiest 10% of the population.
No matter how much you distance yourself from politics, people around you will eventually force you to take a side. It's the unfortunate truth
Very true, thank you!
@@ToonStory-fh4gn You're welcome!
I have a reaction requests for you: Can you please react to Kings and Generals' video about the Great Siege of Gibraltar? I'm from the UK but I live in the south of Spain very close to Gibraltar. It would be cool to see you react to some local history (from my perspective)
Unless you're moderate or independent, and pick sides depending on the issue. You have more effect at the local level, picking judges and aldermen etc. But the presidential election is always simply Slightly Left or Slightly Right in the US. And it needs to head back to Right, this economy sucks LOL.
@@antichoice1 I'm a lefty, so I'm inclined to disagree with that last part
The problem with a two party system is that it creates polarization.
The problem with a multi party system is that sometimes you can't even form a government.
The problem with a one party system is it eventually becomes tyrannical.
The problem with politics is people.
In the US that can't be a problem because the Government in that context is run by one person.
@@Marcus-p5i5s What an adorable spring child you are. The US government is run by corporations with dumptrucks of cash that can and do buy everyone they need to.
@@SamGray aw a 3rd grade drop out got twiggered
I'm just willing to accept that money is the only true power in the world because I've seen it at work. The owner of the company I work for was caught by law enforcement at the airport where his private plane was found to contain a few dozen kilos of a certain illegal white powder. He never spent a single second in jail and didn't go to court at all. He slipped enough cash into pockets that his crime and the media coverage of it just went away. And he's a small fry in the grand scheme of things.
I'd add the problem with politics is politicians (well, not all of them of course)
Interesting to hear you talk about this. It's going to be pretty sketchy in the West for the next few years and what happens in France obviously matters. But I don't think it'll be any different from what is happening elsewhere. The issues are shared and obvious.
My only question I have on the whole situation is this.. is the “far right” actually far right? Are they actually sexist and racist? We have a problem here in the states with the media and left wing politicians claiming anyone who isn’t a democrat of being these things when they clearly aren’t true, and they just use these claims to shut down debates when they start to lose. Racist, sexist, fascist, have all been watered down and lost their true meaning because these words are used so loosely, if you know what I mean?
My point is racism and sexism is actually pretty rare in the states these days but the media and left wing would have you believe it’s a much bigger deal than it really is. Sounds pretty crazy that a prominent political group in France would encourage these horrible beliefs.
Here is my answer, and it reflects only my opinion:
The RN has very close ties with antisemitic, negationnists, supremacists and racist movements.
They want to create discrimination between French citizens and abolish the droit du sol, which has existed since the Ancien Régime and in in breach of Article 1 of our constitution : "France is an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It ensures the equality of all citizens before the law, regardless of origin, race or religion."
The sexist part is linked to their pro-birth policy, which is said to encourage women to confine themselves to the role of housewife. They are, of course, opposed to abortion and in Europe have refused to vote for rights to support the fight against violence against women.
+ If I look at the number of MPs who have been convicted of inciting hatred, it's chilling.
I hope this brought to you some insights. Of course, as I said it is only my answer and I am no political expert.
@@BryanW-bp3le RUBBISH! It's all over the place, have you been walking around blind? And as you go on about left wing, are you a Trump supporter then?
That feeling of not knowing if you belong or not is so reminiscent of after the Mexican American war and even more recently during the world wars where America was making up the lack of manpower by basically opening up the southern border. There are countless stories of of Mexican Americans born and raised in America suddenly automatically being labeled mexicans, with all of the racist language to go with it. When I learned about that I gained so much more respect for not just Mexican Americans but to the culture as a whole.
Thanks for the historical parralel. It must be so hard to somehow lose your identity and being rejected by both Americans & Mexicans because you're kind of in the middle
I thought Le Pen was going to win tbh by how much the news in America was building this up.
Yes, given the exposure she had in France I think it's logical
@@ToonStory-fh4gn Let me enlighten you. Not one single US citizen gives a rats ass about France. You are not that important. The USA will do whatever the f...k it wants no matter who's in charge , you arrogant pos.
I also hate politics. I feel most Americans do, right now. Whichever side you're on, this shit it ridiculous.
Politics is always bad news
@ToonStory-fh4gn hopefully people will remember its politics they truly hate, not one another.
@@thomasnelson6161 Amen to that bro.
@ToonStory-fh4gn someone just tried to kill Donald Trump at a rally. He was winged in the ear and someone standing behind him was hurt badly. I think this is just what we were talking about.
I followed your election closely. So glad France rejected the far right. But I have much sympathy for your people in the foreseen future.
Thank you! The situation remained complicated, and that's not going to be easy
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. - Plato
Well said
@@ToonStory-fh4gn Agreed. I wish I was the one that said it. :)
Your honest assessments are appreciated. This subject caught my attention a while back when I saw a young man there sporting the Che Guevara look and many other young folks projecting unbridled (let's call it anger.) The Che thing is very familiar to me. What I believe is going on comes down to only two ideologies: globalism vs nationalism and it's a worldwide push, not just France. Other labels like right, left, socialism, communism, etc. are immaterial at this point.
Yes thank you. The globalism vs nationalism is quite strong indeed, plus a civilisational dimension. also have the feeling that we live in an extremely polarised and divided world, which also kills any form of dialogue and makes it almost immediate to resort to conflict and the rejection of any form of otherness.
@@ToonStory-fh4gn The question is: what led us here?
@@olibertosoto5470 maybe the fact that people realized that emotion is a better seller than reason
@@ToonStory-fh4gn Yes, and with social media it can be easily sold en masse.
It would be much simpler if they just described this a a run-off.
"Simple" and "French" don't often go together
I don't see how anyone missed this result as soon as the Centre and Left combined forces to drop candidates so moderates and left votes went to whichever candidate was left of the 2 groupings. The system is designed to stop extremes as soon as Parties collude to drop candidates. I just don't think Macron (or anyone else) expected the left to do as well (surprising as the Left is always well organised).
Frankly, when I saw that the left was getting organised, I thought I was high. Macron played a bizarre role, playing on the fear of the two competing parties, and he threw fuel on the fire. Even today, his game is very murky. In short, we're not out of trouble yet!
As an American, French democracy, actually most European style politics, seems so strange to me. The way parliaments can be dissolved. Random elections can be called. Multiple rounds of voting almost like a sports tournament bracket. The way political parties just pop up in the middle of voting. The way y’all protest and riot constantly and the cops seemingly don’t care. The way tractors sprayed manure through downtown Paris and on the police and they didn’t do anything.
None of that happens in the US. I guess it can be attributed to us both being Republics formed under different styles of democracies.
France is absolutely fascinating. Y’all took the cue from Americans after the Revolutionary War and just RAN wild with it.
Europeans also don’t like our style of politics either, like how the popular vote doesn’t automatically guarantee who’s president, only the electoral college vote does that, which is fucking stupid because what’s the point in voting if your vote doesn’t even matter?
I understand that European politics, and even more so those of France, are a bit hard to understand for you in the US. Even I wasn't sure I understood these elections.
The police are quite violent during demonstrations and dozens of people have been seriously injured and crippled as a result of marches that have been supposed to be peaceful for years, and especially since Macron came to power. It's a symbol of our increasingly violent society and political life.
And the tractor stuff was just drunk farmors wanting to have a bit of fun!
All the best from France :)
It's not that we don't like it, it's that it's very different from our system and that having a federal state is a strange concept for many French people who live in a highly centralised country.
As U.S. lately I just go to the Poll show My ID cast My vote and sit and wait for the riots to begin.
Sounds like we are on the same team 🍻
A serious question do you have mail in voting?
We do here in Australia, called an absentee vote.
Of course not, that would be too modern!
why would compromise be considered chaotic? American here, I prefer when there is compromise
You're right, my vocabulary lacks nuance here my bad. Compromise is indeed what makes politics healthy, but I was more referring to a blighted situation where all the currents were going to neutralise each other and prevent any coherent policy. Thank you for challenging me on this point!
You know, ignoring who was on the tickets for a moment, I don't understand how the French and British can put up with a system that can produce such a disconnect between the seat distribution and the popular vote.
Then again here in Germany the system tries to combine direct proportional voting with regional representation which leads to a ballooning Bundestag.
Probably why our political class is so disconnected from their people, and so out of touch with reality. No political system is perfect but ours is in serious need of "rethinking". Thank you!
If one could turn the clock back to just a few decades ago, Marine Le Pen's message would be considered moderate common sense, to save the French identity, be patriotic and require immigrants to assimilate. Today Charles De Gaul is considered far right, no? Just because her father is accused of ties with fascism doesn't make her or her party guilty of it imo. Radicalism whether left or right is not good for anyone.
Today De Gaulles is considered as a traditional right figure, and Gaullism is fondamentally opposed to Petain who's an influential figure in the Rassemblement National. Le Pen has worked on her image to make her party look much smoother, but basically it remains a far-right party as judged by our Institutional Council.
I agree that Patriotism, French Culture and helping the immigrants to assimilate and properly integrate our country are common sense but it goes much further than that in his party. Don't hesitate to let me know if you want me to elaborate on this, thanks for your comment!
@@ToonStory-fh4gn I would absolutely like it if you wish to elaborate on this more because I believe I understand French history better than the average American and I am def interested in learning more because what I know of French politics is only a drop in the bucket. Others likewise can learn more. I can determine from seeing only a few of your videos that you take a calm, common sense approach to things and above all keep a cool head over controversy and criticism in your explanations.
Well first Vive le France as always. As an American I'm happy to be a full throated supporter of all our friends in Europe. Did I understand you correctly that you are in general a supporter of Jean-Luc Mélenchon? I support your nation electing whoever you want but I have heard a lot of this man that makes me wary of him. If I'm wrong about him can you point me to better information about him?
Thank you for your time! I'm not a Mélenchon supporter, but I have to admit that he amuses me. He's an excellent speaker, and a man who fights fiercely for his ideas so I'd love to see him go and kick Macron's arse as Prime Minister. That and even though I think we need reforms, Mélenchon is too divisive and we also need appeasement... It's going to be complicated!
Have you seen the movie; Sarah's Key?.
No and I actually never heard of it... I googled it and it seems very interesting!
Very interesting and informative. Unfortunately we seem to be living in extremist times - something which (it seems to me) has been steadily building since the financial collapse in 2008 and I include both the extreme left and right. I'm getting on in years now and I have never known the UK to be so polarized, as it is now, since the 1980s under Thatcher. The Centre ground seems to have disappeared and no one seems prepared to listen to anyone else's point of view. I like the Internet as a means of sharing views but it seems to be so easy to either indoctrinate people or enrage them. This has contributed to a 'Cancel Culture' where legitimate criticism and disagreement are dismissed as 'hate' and are not tolerated.
Yes, I've been voting for 20 years and for 20 years I've seen the discourse become poorer and more radical, at the same time as the divisions between the parties have widened. And for a very long time I've had the impression that our politicians are totally disconnected from our problems, at least in my opinion. That's why I prefer History, I guess... Thank you, all my friendship from accross the pond!
@@ToonStory-fh4gn talking of history- I recently watched an excellent documentary series on the 100 years war. i was hoping to send you a link but I don't seem to be able to do that. Entitled 'Chivalry and betrayal' in 3 parts presented by Dr Nina Ramirez. it is available to watch online - maybe you could feature it on your channel - I'd be very interested in your perspective.
@@cliffordwaterton3543 thank you, well received I'll have a look 🫡
What are your impressions regarding these elections? I'll admit I'm high, so maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear much about what you think? Honestly I expected something from you, not a reaction. Still, I'm learning quite a bit that I wasn't taught, so thank you. Assurer? Scary times, the US is bonkers right now.
Well done for going through your countries system, I feel I have a little more idea about what’s going on. I’m English and our voting system is in need of change. I do understand your fears for the future, is this a general thing that affects the entire of Europe I wonder.
Yeah, I think too our system needs reforms. Our future is sometimes a bit scary, but let's not lose hope that things can improve.
Take care my friend
At least England was smart enough to get out of the European Union!!!👍
@@jabreck1934 Well I won’t be disagreeing with you there, 72 yrs old and wanted out.
Why does it appear France seems to have no real moderate socialist / socially liberal party on the ballot?
Oh! Excellent question, glad you asked.
Because they are unable to set aside their egos for one minute to agree that overall they have the same values and maybe their priority should be to try unite and to seize the power in order to re-shift the balance and create a more interesting political dynamic but no that's funnier to remain divided
@@ToonStory-fh4gnFrance probably needs some sort of electoral reform in this case.
@@BC_26fhj oh yes, big times
I think the National Rally can trigger positive reforms for France. I’m not far right or anything but I think this movement should have a chance.
I agree, the immigration situation needs to be changed in some manner. The current system is not sustainable
They had a chance and they were beaten, thank God. Since when have Nazis triggered positive reforms. We all know what they want. They want what Trump wants, what Putin wants.
@@ryanschrum9872 the leaders in Europe made a big mistake with their open door policies letting in people with completely different values.
Okay, here's how I feel, and simply how I feel about it:
My country is in vital need for reform, and something new.
Throughout the campaign I saw the intellectual poverty of their representatives, their inability to put a figure on the slightest measure, their lack of understanding of fundamental topics...
BUT political experts and scholars have calculated that the far right would need 18 months to demolish the rule of law in France and do pretty much as they please.
As a history buff, I can see very much how they could replicate what happened in Germany in 1933.
@@ToonStory-fh4gn yeah look I mean there can be comparisons made in that regard for these situations, but keep in mind that our modern world now is quite different from how it was in the 1930s. It’s a very interconnected society in our globe. If a country like France or Italy for that matter were to start behaving the same way as the Third Reich, there would be a swift international reaction involving economic sanctions and trade embargoes which would completely crush the nations in question. That’s why someone like Marine Le Pen has opposed Holocaust denial and also deporting non white citizens of France.
Interesting video my friend.
Don't get me started on politics,being Scottish were ruled by English labour,or English Torres,either way Scotland loses,the English torries,shut down our coal mines,steel works,an moved them to England to get votes,cause the Scott's don't vote for torries,that was Maggie thatcher the most hated prime minister in Scotland,we celebrated her death in Scotland.
Anyway until the politicians start answering the questions there asked or tell the truth,I'm not interested in what they say.
Thanks bro. Politics = bad news, period. The only politician who has excited me a little since I don't know when was Macron at the very beginning, who seemed a little different from the others and who exploded the traditional balance of our parties. Well, we've been ripped off like rookies.
Oh, the "FarRight". Are those the "People I don't agree with?"
Well, in this case it's a party that has been designated as "far" by the Constitutional Council