Le moteur économique français a calé (encore)
To-day's update again concerns the multi-fold misadventures our moral betters in Europe. First, for those of you wondering, the recent German election (18 September) is still dragging on. A key vote in the city of Dresden again gave a (marginal) victory to Angie Merkel's CDU/CSU party. However, the SPD is only four votes behind in the Bundestag, and are still demanding to lead the governing coalition. Talks are still dragging on, and it appears that a "grand coalition" will be formed so that productivity will cease altogether.
Meantime, in the other part of the European Union's "Engine", French Workers have called a massive general strike for reasons that are not entirely clear. Though this is hardly news (there are massive strikes in France every year), what's interesting about this one is that the Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin (previously famous for crying on the Battlefield of Waterloo), is about as far-left as one can get outside the Communist party. Even de Villepin knows that the current French economic structure is untenable and bound to collapse, and that reforms are necessary. We'll see whether France sinks or swims.
Next, in the progressive Scandinavian lands, a disabled man in Denmark has demanded that the state to reimburse him for his visits to local prostitutes. It'll be interesting to see whether this will spur the Danes to consider the crazy "Anglo-Saxon" (as the French call it) idea of "personal responsibility."
Finally, the news from merry Albion grows increasingly bleak. In the government corrections bureaucracy, employees have been banned from wearing the flag of St. George, which is England's national flag, because it's used as a symbol by nationalists. The BBC ran a poll discussing "changing" the national flag to make it less offensive. To add insult to injury, Dudley Borough Council has banned likenesses of pigs to appease the vocal Muslim minority population. Oddly enough, Muslims are only banned from eating pork, not reading it (or, in the case of our country, seeing it built on their campus).
It seems to me that ridiculousness in government advances in stages. First, a ridiculous proposal is disguised as "sensible" and "necessary." Its critics are silenced with terms like "we're just banning smoking in restaurants, which is in the public interest because they are public places. It's not like we're banning everywhere." That accomplished, a few years pass by to allow the lawsuits to settle, and then an ambitious councillor puts for the idea to "ban smoking in all public places." Though far-reaching, he notes the success of the previous ban as an example, and silences critics with "we're targeting only one, very specific behaviour that is demonstrably deadly to all. It's not as if we're banning fast food because it's fattening." Another ban passes, and a few years later the same health-types begin examining the idea of banning "trans fats" in food. Thus, the government becomes so ridiculous that it goes beyond parody and its citizens are solemnly convinced of the necessity of extreme measures against a bogeyman that never truly threatened their safety.
Meantime, in the other part of the European Union's "Engine", French Workers have called a massive general strike for reasons that are not entirely clear. Though this is hardly news (there are massive strikes in France every year), what's interesting about this one is that the Prime Minister, Dominique de Villepin (previously famous for crying on the Battlefield of Waterloo), is about as far-left as one can get outside the Communist party. Even de Villepin knows that the current French economic structure is untenable and bound to collapse, and that reforms are necessary. We'll see whether France sinks or swims.
Next, in the progressive Scandinavian lands, a disabled man in Denmark has demanded that the state to reimburse him for his visits to local prostitutes. It'll be interesting to see whether this will spur the Danes to consider the crazy "Anglo-Saxon" (as the French call it) idea of "personal responsibility."
Finally, the news from merry Albion grows increasingly bleak. In the government corrections bureaucracy, employees have been banned from wearing the flag of St. George, which is England's national flag, because it's used as a symbol by nationalists. The BBC ran a poll discussing "changing" the national flag to make it less offensive. To add insult to injury, Dudley Borough Council has banned likenesses of pigs to appease the vocal Muslim minority population. Oddly enough, Muslims are only banned from eating pork, not reading it (or, in the case of our country, seeing it built on their campus).
It seems to me that ridiculousness in government advances in stages. First, a ridiculous proposal is disguised as "sensible" and "necessary." Its critics are silenced with terms like "we're just banning smoking in restaurants, which is in the public interest because they are public places. It's not like we're banning everywhere." That accomplished, a few years pass by to allow the lawsuits to settle, and then an ambitious councillor puts for the idea to "ban smoking in all public places." Though far-reaching, he notes the success of the previous ban as an example, and silences critics with "we're targeting only one, very specific behaviour that is demonstrably deadly to all. It's not as if we're banning fast food because it's fattening." Another ban passes, and a few years later the same health-types begin examining the idea of banning "trans fats" in food. Thus, the government becomes so ridiculous that it goes beyond parody and its citizens are solemnly convinced of the necessity of extreme measures against a bogeyman that never truly threatened their safety.
posted by The Admiral at 1:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home