Another swellhead hypocrite – who is convinced of having saved France as much as Gordon Clown dreamt of having saved the world – exits the stage. To no one’s surpise, not even his…
The promised surprise in the run-off election didn’t happen. Thus, Nicolas Sarkozy must step down, leaving his conterparts in the USA, EU, and NATO wondering about the future.
How and to what extent would France change under a ‘Mr Normal’ type of president, as François Hollande describes himself?
Under Sarko ‘the extravagant’, things worked out pretty well for the American (+ NATO) and German (+ EU) interests. Or, at least, everything was predictable.
On the one hand, Sarkozy indebted the country as no other before him – both as minister for Budget (1993-1995) and as President (2007-2012).
On the one other hand, he prescribed the same inane panacea – austerity. In mild doses for France, in deadly doses for Greece.
There’s nothing unusual about this hypocrisy. Excessive spending followed by excessive austerity are irrational only from the perspective of the taxpayer.
For those who decide them and their wealthy friends (from Paris or elsewhere), these apparently irreconcible policies surely have profitable reasons.
And here comes Hollande, a kind of accidental president. As lacklustre as John Kerry in the US presidential election of 2004, yet certainly luckier than him.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s philandering made François Hollande the new president of France. Only fanatical leftists could outline other merits of his.
As for wacky promises, he’s as good at selling them as others. He said he would tax by 75% all incomes over 1 million euros a year.
That’s second only to the 100% tax on incomes over 360,000 euros envisaged by Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the Trotskyst candidate.
It’s possible that this is but typical electoral campaign crap, however, does Hollande have any viable solutions to back up his ‘no more austerity’ slogan?!
[For all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]
|
2 comments:
It will be interesting to see how things go. Originally I thought Sarko had some views which were important to modern France. He was one of the few practicing Christians to be French President and he spoke about being tough on multiculturalism and France's ghettoised Muslim population. In truth though I think these were soundbytes he expected to be echoed by the left rather than obligations to the conservatives. I don't think he achieved anything in either giving a voice for socially conservative French Catholics or in assimilating the Muslims. His time in power will probably be remembered for its cronyism and his reconciliation with the USA. Though this later could end if Romney wins the next election and if Islamists (as seems likely) gain the upper hand in the 'Arab Spring' it could be regarded as a waste of money.
Still, as regards Hollande, I can't see things getting much worse and he hasn't made many great promises.
I have not yet found if he favours withdrawing France from NATO. It seemed pretty ridiculous of Sarko to join when it has firstly outlived its original purpose and secondly might expand to include some unstable members.
Gregor,
I can't possibly imagine what sources had convinced you that Sarko was - at any given time in his life! - a kind of "practicing Christian" as long as the ethics of his deeds remain very questionable.
The are doubts that Sarkozy truly 'achieved' anything for the French; he didn't 'save' them from the effects of the global crisis, he only saved the banks.
*
I'd personally wish to see any Republican at the White House rather than a Democrat, however, I don't know whether Romney could beat Obama...
Sarko's closeness to America surely served Washington's interests in certain moments, but did his actions serve France's interests?!
Post a Comment