Metal Reviews

A socialist working for the IMF? Fail.

Fixed it for ya.

Marine le Pen must be wetting herself. The left all over Europe is undergoing a bit of a fail at the moment... let's hope the far-right doesn't step into the gap left.

"Social health care and the like" isn't self- administrating, now is it?

No, but the principle is essential and must be attempted regardless.

Impressive, compared to the usual level of American political debate. I'm currently revising for my exams on international organizations and international law, and the banality to which such massively complex issues are reduced to by jingoistic idiots is appalling. "Bullies respect strength, not weakness" is not a valid approach to the question of intervention and sovereignty. Jesus.

No, it shouldn't.
The definition of crazy is attempting the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, or something like that.
Yeah, that's just what we need more government control and ineptitude...


Do you honestly believe that more dependence on government is a good thing?

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have."

To be fair, Marine le Pen (national party), Nicolas Sarkozy (right), center (Jean-Louis Borloo, François Bayrou) and socialists candidates (or wannabe candidates : François Hollande, Martine Aubry) are all wetting themselves. The guy was waaaaay ahead all others. It's really huge here, everybody talks about it. Some of us want him in jail, while others swear this is nothing but a despicable plot.

I don't know who is right, but recent news lead to think there is no conspiracy at all...

(Oh and don't worry Zad, Le Pen has absolutely no chance whatsoever to be elected.... in 2012.)



DSK really isn't a true socialist. He is a libertarian who cares about social issues. And he likes women a tad too much.

Heh, small comfort. The story is so crazy it seems hard to comprehend - according to my understanding he's accused of raping a random hotel maid? It seems pretty straightforward, far more serious than the very serious accusations against Assange.

Ah, politicians. Being British, our current 'big' scandal is far less interesting -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13416203

I would recommend a devolution of power to the individual states to facilitate administration and grant more value to the individual vote of citizens for the area in which they live. To use the UK as a potential comparison, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England essentially have almost entirely different governments. For example, in England, the National Health Service is undergoing large cuts from the government and university tuition fees are going up because of Conservative policies in Westminster. In Scotland, the opposite is taking place, with a left-wing government making the maintenance of the NHS and free university the cornerstone of their manifesto- because Scottish people voted for the left, and English people voted for the right.

If you wish to, I can explain to you why DSK is a true socialist in the modern sense of the word. And that's judging on his action as a mayor, minister and even at the head of the IMF which was not an easy task.
Mind you, I don't like the guy much but - just like Fabius - he suffers from unfair views regarding his political leanings.

In the modern sense? The IMF promotes free market policies through structural adjustment unless he is the anti-IMF head of IMF he is being a pretty shitty socialist. Unless by socialist, you just mean that he thinks people should receive things from the society which they live in and for the taxes they pay.

Sorry man, but to me "socialism" and "modern" just doesn't compute. Seriously though, I never said he's a right-winger. He's a center-left guy. Not really what I expect from a socialist (which I am not, I must say). Aubry, Fabius, hell, even Hollande are socialists. Mélanchon was one too, before he became an asshole. But DSK ? Really ?

Muslims are pushing for Australia to adopt Sharia law. Apparently they're entitled to "legal pluralism" and don't have to respect the laws of their adopted country

Thank fuck the Government said no.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/govt-blocks-sharia-law-push-by-federation-of-islamic-councils/story-e6frf7jo-1226057428592

I always think if a migrant doesn't like their new country, doesn't want to integrate and has no respect for that country's laws, they should be sent back to their own fucking country.

And yes I am a first generation migrant.

Amen.

Conservatism and immigration can be incompatible at times or so it seems, I've never heard it argued that the immigrant should never follow another countries laws. But the finer "point" of integration meaning adaptation of cultural standards, is something I don't see being firmly argued. I'm not saying that one should never adapt the term "American", but the whole surrendering of heritage in exchange for a new term seems inherently collectivist.

I'm not talking about whole sale adoption of the new country's culture e.g. changing relgion, what one eats, language they speak in their home etc.

However the new immigrant has to embrace their new country, respect the values and laws of the new country and attempt to play an active role in the community.

They should never inflict their own cultural values on to their new country or act against their new country's interests.

The prior sentiment of "embracing" a countries values is another logical collectivist fault in arguing for assimilation of said immigrant. The example of Islamic immigrants to the EU is one I definitely agree with, though their actions tend to support what you are saying as they demand more or less for the state to accommodate them. This is not what I am saying and we stand in agreement there, yet values and laws are not the same thing. So long as the immigrant body abides in the laws and contributes to the overall economic soundness, wellbeing, and maintains the community at an exemplary level than relinquishing old customs seems a non-issue.

Really.
Either it's his preoccupation with maintaining a semblance of balance between social care and the realism dictated by the state of the economy in (for example) Portugal and Greece. According to the governments of both countries, things would have gotten even worse without DSK at the head of the IMF.
In Sarcelles, a near Paris town where he was mayor for a few years, his politics was clearly socialist as he hepled ease the social tensions between popular neighbourhood and the richest parts of the city.
As the minister of the "Economy and Finance" from 1997 to 2001 he managed to finance the social part of the newly established Left-Winged majority lead by Prime Minister Lionel Jospin. It may not seem like much but, considering the state of French finances back them, it wasn't an easy task to achieve, a talented economist such as DSK managed it where very few would.
These are but a few facts showing DSK's reputation as a right-winged-socialist is greatly exagereted. There are more things to dig on the internet to prove DSK's profound attachment to socialism, you might want to look into it before commenting any further.
Anyway, if you think Aubry, Hollande or Royal are very different from DSK, you're seriously mistaking. All the French socialists leaders pretty much agree on how to handle worlwide capitalism to smoothe its effects down. In my opinion their "method" is as efficient as giving aspirine to someone with a cancer but that's a whole other debate we can discuss some other time...