It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Strikes and protests in France

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   
So, not quite breaking news...

Linky BBC

Over 1 million on strike and protesting throughout France.

As we have seen, this seems increasingly to break down into riots and looting later in the day in other European countries. And France has a history of revolting.


It seems that there are different groups calling for different things, but the overriding theme is banks being bailed out while the people get nothing but the bill at the end of it.

I think that this can be officially added to the list of protests against government due to the financial crisis, and if so, what do you think the rest of the day will hold in store?

There are quite a few hours yet before night falls, so I guess it could peter out into nothing. But should it?

What does it take to make leaders listen to the people and is violent protest ever justified?

Your thoughts?




posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 09:04 AM
link   
I really question whether it is wise to even have a strike, even a one day strike, with the current economy. IMO there are already more than enough people unemployed willing to take their job. Furthermore, they are hurting their own economy by making companies lose business. IMO I value that they want to express their anger over the current economic situation, but I think they should have chosen a method that wouldn't hurt their economy further.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


Its more about telling the Government who's boss than worrying about the marginal loss in their economy from the one day protest.

More countries should do this - especially the US. The French/UK/US/German/Spanish governments are too far from the people. Protests involving millions of people in each of these counties shows their governments that they can be easily kicked out on their asses.

I bet Sarcozy is not so smug now.



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
again....???

This IS news.

The french are notorious for striking and fair play to 'em.

It's Britain who will feel the blow the worst. We've forgotten what striking means. Maggie Thatcher left a glancing blow when she had power, now we are feeling the chameleon underbelly of the child she created.

But.... such is life. At least it ain't raining.


[edit on 29-1-2009 by mr-lizard]



posted on Jan, 29 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   
The BBC are reporting that riots have broken out in several areas.

I'm trying to find linkage but I can't seem to find anything online yet, I guess this is pretty recent.

At least it's no big surprise, it seems every protest recently about the economic crisis is becoming an all out battle with Police.

I'll find media once it's available.



posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Take away the idealism and romance of revolution, the overthrow of corrupt despots, and how will it help the downtrodden?

Well we now take our politics pre-digested for us by the media for starters. Elections are more like casting movies than picking the right policies. Whoever has the best marketing campaign wins.

I hate the self-serving corruption and abuse that has set in to Western administrations, but let's find a viable alternative before we get rid of them?

Look what happened in a British colony called Rhodesia. The evil imperialists were kicked out by a champion of freedom and self-determination, Robert Mugabe. In 30 years the country has turned from a relatively prosperous state with a high standard of living by the continent's standards, to a dire starvation and disease ridden basket case.

Cuba may be a better example, but its the quality of life really better than it would be without Castro? Can we say he's not a dictator?

Revolution doesn't necessarily mean things get better, does it.

Viva la Revolucion.



Mike F



posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
If you want to use Cuba as an example of how bad socialism or revolution, or dictators is, you must include the fact that much of their situation now is due to the fact that the US has been constantly at war with them since the beginning as well, and has had them under constant embargos and such too. Who knows what Cuba might be like now if it had had the support and friendship of the US originally rather than our aggression and attacks.



posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Proud to be Acadien on days like today!

God i love the french, a people so P-OED for the littlest things. But then again they do get what they want, and they're governments work for them apparently.

That would be a nice change.

Although i do agree that striking during these economic times, is not the smartest thing to do, but if your gonna prove a point, there's no better time than now i guess.

All the power to em!

~Keeper



posted on Feb, 1 2009 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by pexx421
If you want to use Cuba as an example of how bad socialism or revolution, or dictators is, you must include the fact that much of their situation now is due to the fact that the US has been constantly at war with them since the beginning as well, and has had them under constant embargos and such too. Who knows what Cuba might be like now if it had had the support and friendship of the US originally rather than our aggression and attacks.



Not trying to show socialism or Communism is bad, just pointing out that Revolution doesn't immediately translate to better standards of life and more equality.

I live in South America a good part of my life, and have spent much time in Cuba. If you want to balance factors like the American embargo you should also point out how the Soviet Union supported Cuba with billions in goods and preferred services for decades. Castro never built up an effective internal infrastructure as he got accustomed to being subsidized. He snubbed his nose at the US saying he was at war with it. The US said "Fine!" He has become a dictator and I don't see much difference between him and Batista who he replaced 50 years ago.

My point was revolution has to change things for the better - not just for the sake of removing bad guys and giving people a brief cathartic rush.

If you just throw out, say, the Republicans and Democrats, whose going to fill the power vacuum? Someone with guns, organization, something able to enforce their will. Either the military or organized crime is the closest thing we have ready and waiting. This happened in Russia after Yeltsin fumbled the ball in the 90s. The Chinese or the Russians would also be happy to come in and run the show for us.

Revolution has to mean offering an immediately available viable alternative not just overthrowing an incumbent administration and system.

I see nothing developing that offers this right now.

Be careful what you wish for when you see people rioting in the streets. Anarchy is not fun.



Mike F



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 04:21 AM
link   
US oppression of Cuba hardly started with Castro saying he was their enemy. It originated when Cuba asked the US for help throwing spain out so they could self govern and declare independence. The US did.....and then tried to take over themselves. It is THIS that birthed the schism between US and Cuba that has existed since. As to soviet involvement...the soviet union, despite what many say, was never able to compete with the US, militarily OR economically. So no amount of soviet support would be able to offset US aggression so close to their base of power.
Now i do see what you are saying as to revolution needing some viable system to supplant the force it is overthrowing...however your allusion to the idea that the democrats balance the republicans in our current system is flawed. They are both members of the "corporatist party", and while they may disagree on trivial things such as who the benificiaries of tax dollars are, or whether abortion is legal, smoking, etc, both come to the same conclusion on all the major decisions, corporate decisions, such as war, more taxes, more limitations on american freedoms, and enforcing american corporate interests around the world.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by pexx421

i do see what you are saying as to revolution needing some viable system to supplant the force it is overthrowing...however your allusion to the idea that the democrats balance the republicans in our current system is flawed. They are both members of the "corporatist party", and while they may disagree on trivial things such as who the benificiaries of tax dollars are, or whether abortion is legal, smoking, etc, both come to the same conclusion on all the major decisions, corporate decisions, such as war, more taxes, more limitations on american freedoms, and enforcing american corporate interests around the world.



I'm no champion of the major US parties. They both are self-serving and corrupt. But whoever takes over the reins of power has to contend with economic and political arrangement already in place that keeps the system going and the trade flowing.


MF



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:56 PM
link   
But that economic and political arrangement is theft and oppression, backed by a strongly manipulative media, and these are the VERY things we want to change with a revolution. The whole problem here is that we have a system of politics that protects the wealth of the minority elite, and keeps cash flowing from the bottom up.....and this is also what necessitates our constant need for expansion and conquest of other nations resources as well. All of our problems stem from the inherent unfairness of a system (corporatist) where PROFIT is the highest virtue and main guiding factor.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   
And besides, said system is not keeping going, nor is it keeping trade flowing. Both are breaking down at an alarming rate, so this would be a perfect opportunity to try a new system (or will be very shortly) without having to suffer any more massive social upheaval than we will be going through anyhow.



posted on Feb, 2 2009 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I think that we should take some notes on what the french are doing

Viva La Resistance! - wait that's french right?

[edit on 2-2-2009 by Cio88]



posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 07:39 PM
link   
The saddening thing is that most maybe all revolutions of the 29th Century had autocratic oppressive regimes replaced by ones that were often worse in their assertion of control, punishment of dissent, and control of information.

Look at Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, Argentina, too many African states to start counting - but outstanding is the horror show in Zimbabwe.

Regime changes and makeovers of countries without disemboweling the infrastructure in place works better most often.

If the US has a radical change coming up, don't count on sitting on the Internet posting away the way you are now. And don't count on your new government tolerating open criticism and dissent the way the current 'bad' one does.

You may some day be nostalgic for what you have today.

Ask about a billion people who have seem political shifts supposedly for the better.


Mike F



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join