… but their voting percentages put ours to shame (although not readers of blogs, I assume, who probably vote in even higher percentages).
UPDATE: According to the WSJ, the French have overwhelmingly rejected the proposed European Union constitution. It is hard to imagine how Chirac will recover from this.
PARIS — The French decisively rejected the European Union’s proposed new constitution, plunging the bloc into political paralysis and putting at least a temporary break on five decades of movement toward an ever-stronger pan-European government.
President Jacques Chirac said in a televised address late Sunday that he would decide later this week whether to shuffle his cabinet in response to the vote, which amounted to a bitter personal defeat for the French leader. A staunch supporter of the constitution, he conceded that his countrymen had spurned the charter, after partial official results indicated that the “no” vote was carrying the day by a margin of 57% to 43%.
“It is your decision, it is your sovereign decision, and I take note of it,” he said.
Please, do.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
115 Comments
1. Terrye:I wonder if that turnout of 66% is higher than usual. If not, they do better than most.
May 29, 2005 - 12:53 pm 2. Barry Dauphin:I seem to recall pretty good turnout for this past (presidential) election. We vote on Tuesdays and not Sunday. And this election is about whether to remain a nation or submerge into something Brussels controls. And with double digit unemployment, they have nothing else to do!
May 29, 2005 - 12:53 pm 3. PeterUK:You didn’t expect it to be Kosher dis you? Telegraph
They are thousands of miles from Brussels but these palm-fringed islands could decide the future of Europe
Henry Samuel in Paris
(Filed: 08/05/2005)
Fresh battle lines over the French referendum on the European Union constitution are being drawn up thousands of miles from Paris in a string of palm-fringed islands whose voters could seal Europe’s fate.
With the result in the referendum on May 29 too close to call according to opinion polls, Yes campaigners are systematically turning the screws on 1.2 million voters in France’s far-flung overseas departments and territories.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn: Socialist Yes campaigner
They include the Caribbean islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe, and Tahiti in the Pacific. Voters are being subjected to a blanket “awareness” campaign reminding them of how much they gain from the EU – and stand to lose – in an attempt to secure their support.
Separately, the European Commission has substantially increased funding this year to some of France’s former dominions.
Opponents of the constitution, which is backed by France’s two main political parties, have likened the official campaign to blackmail.
May 29, 2005 - 12:59 pm 4. chuck:Early take, 56% non. The official results are due shortly. I don’t know if this is a good or a bad thing. The constitution itself is junk, I think, but France at this time strikes me as pre-revolutionary with some parallels to 1789: entrenched social entitlements making the nation’s problems intractable.
May 29, 2005 - 1:01 pm 5. KrilliX:voting pecentages is usually very high in italy, higher even than france. it doesnt mean our countries are more “democratic”. its a matter of different history.
1) in europe democracy is younger and we are still happy to vote. and for many years voting in europe was meant to be a vote pro or against comunism. urss was really close to us and the iron curtain was at our borders.
2) in europe the State is a BIG thing. it moves a big part of our economy (and jobs: your party wins you get more chances to have a job in the burocracy or in one of the several state industries)
3) we vote on weekends. UK is the only place (i think) in europe where they still vote during the week
4) in usa governement is, after all, less invasive in your daylife. and after all normal people is not “afraid” of democrats nor republicans
soooooooo
after all a not high voting percentages can also be seen as the result of a real free country
May 29, 2005 - 1:09 pm 6. richard mcenroe:LGF has some notes on the quality of the French turnout…
May 29, 2005 - 1:16 pm 7. Buddy Larsen:This just in, from FoxNews, French ‘overwhelmingly’ have rejected the EU Constitution! Yay, “the people”!
May 29, 2005 - 1:19 pm 8. David Thomson:ìThe CSA polling institute estimated that final turnout would reach 75 pct, while Ipsos predicted that final participation would be at least 76 pct.î
The citizens of the United States probably do not really want to see a voter turnout of 75%+. This will almost certainly be a sign that all hell is breaking out. Voter indifference may paradoxically be evidence of overall contentment. We must never overlook our statistical weirdness. Few people take politics as seriously as do the host and commenters of this blog. Does that make us more virtuous? Are others getting a free ride? Whatever, thatís just the way it is.
May 29, 2005 - 1:24 pm 9. Erik:The voter turnout in the US isn’t counted the same way as it is in Scandinavia, which makes the turnout look a lot lower in the US. I’m not sure about France, but I haven’t seen any study showing that turnout is lower there than in Scandinavia, so I believe France count the same way as Scandinavia.
The difference is this:
Scandinavia (and most likely the rest of Europe) count *all votes* divided with the number of *eligeble voters*.
The US counts all *valid* votes, divided with the number of people of *voting age* (including illegal immigrants). That’s according to the US census for the 2004 election.
In european countries, how you count it doesn’t really matter, but in the US, that makes a lot of difference in percentage.
I actually compared the numbers for the last Swedish election with the 2004 US turnout, and when calculated the same way, it’s not that much of a difference, I believe it was 5% difference something.
As an interesting sidenote, the Swedish voter turnout for the last EU election was, if I remember correctly, 28% something…
May 29, 2005 - 1:36 pm 10. mcg:their voting percentages put ours to shame
To which I have to ask: so what?
May 29, 2005 - 1:42 pm 11. Rick Ballard:As Krillix notes, voting in Europe gives rise to LePetomane sentiments; “We’ve gotta protect our phoney-baloney jobs, gentlemen, we must do something about this immediately!” Wrt France, lets not forget that “chauvinism” is not an Anglo-Saxon term. French plumbers worrying about Polish plumbers coming to town had a great deal to do with the “Just Say Non” result.
This isn’t going to stop the Kojevians because nothing short of death has ever stopped the committed socialist. For them,this is just a rest stop on the road to inevability.
May 29, 2005 - 2:11 pm 12. Stephen_M:From WaPo
What, until they get it right?
May 29, 2005 - 2:21 pm 13. PeterUK:To quote Steven Pound MP “The people have spoken… the bastards”
http://www.benhammersley.com/weblog/2004/01/04/the_people_have_spoken_the_bastards.html
May 29, 2005 - 2:21 pm 14. chuck:This isn’t going to stop the Kojevians because nothing short of death has ever stopped the committed socialist.
But Rick, the committed socialists opposed the treaty, or at least a significant part of them did, including an ex prime minister. Le Pen also opposed. The common thread as far as I can tell is France for the French, no to the anglo-saxons.
The Netherlands are next. The Germans are left standing at the alter as their erstwhile bride just vants to be alone and, lo, perfidious Albion can contemplate the revival of traditional relations with France.
May 29, 2005 - 2:30 pm 15. chuck:Here’s a running account from the Netherlands, zacht ei.
May 29, 2005 - 2:40 pm 16. PeterUK:No just doesn’t mean no,Read this dismal document,if ever there was a justification for revolution again this is it.
http://www.iai.it/pdf/DocIAI/iai0503e.pdf
May 29, 2005 - 2:42 pm 17. PeterUK:Chuck
“Albion can contemplate the revival of traditional relations with France”
“Does that mean we can put the “De Gaulle out of its misery”.
May 29, 2005 - 2:47 pm 18. Rick Ballard:Chuck – use of the term “Kojevian” really did define the type of “committed socialist” I was writing of, no?
The labor socialists rejected the treaty on an anticapitalist basis because Kojevian mercantilism “takes too long”. Chauvinism really was the thing though. Why must the French be so provincial?
Non this week, nee next week and nein in the fall. You think Britain and France are resuming traditional relations? Then I hope the Brits catch the French fleet in port.
May 29, 2005 - 2:50 pm 19. chuck:“Does that mean we can put the “De Gaulle out of its misery”.
Certainly, although I understand you will have to move fast before it goes down on its own. The De Gaulle is not the Bismarck.
May 29, 2005 - 2:50 pm 20. chuck:Meanwhile, work on the d’Estaing has been halted due to newly discovered design flaws.
May 29, 2005 - 3:08 pm 21. Kevin P:Roger:
“And I take note of it”
That has the sound of “I’ll put it in my In-box and deal with it when I feel like it.” I don’t think the “bastard” quote fits. This sounds more like you may have the sovereign vote but I run things.You spoke,I heard, It will just be a tad harder to do exactly what I want.
PeterUK, does this mean Blair will delay the vote or will he have to put it up for vote next year anyway. It seems as if the yes vote would be a hard sell while the French are trying to renegotiate the right to drive tractors into McDonalds.
May 29, 2005 - 3:08 pm 22. Terrye:I read that the EU constitution is about 446 pages long. The US constitution is about 10 pages long. That is self defeating.
They have never forgiven us for getting it right and for making peace with the English. This prejudice against the Anglo Saxon is a French trait that will never end.
They are contrary. I know there are dedicated socialists and that has a lot to do with this. But I was more worried about the trouble making potential of a unified Europe.
May 29, 2005 - 3:25 pm 23. chuck:Next time, they’ll get it right.
May 29, 2005 - 3:29 pm 24. richard mcenroe:According to samizdata.net, the Brussels Bandits are advocating going ahead with unification even if the member states don’t ratify the EU constitution… thus we see again the true nature of the modern “progressive”… profoundly antidemocratic at its most fundamental levels.
May 29, 2005 - 3:30 pm 25. PeterUK:Kevin P,
Blair was petrified that a referendum would be a vote on his period in office also,he now has a chance to declare that a referendum is superfluous,and he will.”And with one bound the bugger was free”.Again!!
It would be a mistake to think that this vote actually means anything,virtually all the attributes of a state have been put in place by other treaties,the Constitution was merely have replaced them.
The Eurocrats will keep gnawing away like deathwatch beetles in the attic until the whole empty edifice comes crashing down in a pile of dust.
I feel sorry for poor Fritz,left waiting at the altar by Marianne,he’s paid for everything,the reception, the honeymoon,and he is left standing there in a suit a couple of sizes too small and holding a bunch of wilted flowers.
May 29, 2005 - 3:36 pm 26. Terrye:Peter:
Yes well, even a symbolic victory is worth something.
Besides, this is the French. They can get a bit testy. Push them and they might storm the Bastille again. Man that was one mean revolution. ripping out people’s hearts, cutting off heads, stoning people to death. not pretty at all.
May 29, 2005 - 3:44 pm 27. PeterUK:Terrye,
The French would simply be celebrating their culture.
A quote from Robert Carr speaking for England.
To all French cryto-communists, syndicalists, marxists, trotskyites, leninists, stalinists, national socialists, socialist nationalists, primitivists, Trade Union dinosaurs, student activists, greenie nutters, neo-fascists, old fashioned fascists, quasi-crypto-troglodyte-Pol-Pottist-year zero-flat-earthers, looney tunes and enviro-goons….Merci Beaucoup!!!!
May 29, 2005 - 3:58 pm 28. Catherine:NYTIMES says crushing defeat.
My husband thinks if someone else were president the vote would have been yes . . . .
May 29, 2005 - 4:08 pm 29. Catherine:PeterUK
LOL!
My husband says 80% of French conservatives voted yes . . . socialists heavily voted no . . .
May 29, 2005 - 4:25 pm 30. PeterUK:Catherine,
It has been said of the French “That they voted Right for all the Wrong reasons” bless’em!
May 29, 2005 - 4:28 pm 31. PeterUK:Sorry David Carr Samizdata.
May 29, 2005 - 4:36 pm 32. Buddy Larsen:I think Catherine’s husband is right. President John F. Fatuous Doubletalk would’ve had things so bollixed by now, nothing as sensible as the “non!’ would’ve happened.
Peter, your posts are cracking me up…I can just see Fritz standing there with his hair wet-combed.
As far as catching the French fleet in port, I believe the Brits are building the new French aircraft carrier. For the Royal Navy to sink it, having it already in a British rather than in a French port should make the job marginally easier. Ahh, I take that back, rejecting Chirac, they deserve a day of respect.
May 29, 2005 - 4:40 pm 33. chuck:Catherine,
Which president, Chirac or Bush? I have the sense your husband means Chirac, but if not we can chalk up one continent liberated by Bush.
May 29, 2005 - 4:44 pm 34. Fausta:It looks like Raffarin will get fired. Will Chirac choose pompous Villepin as PM, or will he choose Sarkozy?
The Guardian: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/eu/story/0,9061,1495483,00.html
Commentators agree that Mr Chirac is naturally reluctant to give Mr Sarkozy the job, despite that fact that it could well prove a poisoned chalice for a bitter rival, since he believes it is essential for president and prime minister to get on, and the two loathe each other.
Mr Sarkozy’s campaign for the yes camp in the referendum, moreover, consistently stressed his differences with Mr Chirac; for example, his belief that France urgently needs deeper, structural freemarket reforms, particularly to its rigid labour market, if it is to compete. Mr Sarkozy was the only French politician to say the French should vote yes to the treaty “to change France”, and to dare suggest that the French social model was “no longer the best”.
But if Mr Chirac feels that the scale of the no victory demands radical action, government officials have suggested he may overcome his scruples in order to salvage at least something from his presidency – even if that means allowing Mr Sarkozy a free hand to be “prime minister of France, and not prime minister of Jacques Chirac”.
I hope he picks Sarkozy.
May 29, 2005 - 5:06 pm 35. Buddy Larsen:I thought she meant GWB.
Just for fun, I tabbed ‘image’ and typed in ‘Fritz’ on Google, and believe that this is the proper wistful expression, upon hearing of the French vote.
May 29, 2005 - 5:08 pm 36. Terrye:Buddy and chuck:
I wondered which president she meant as well.
I think the French economy is on a collision course with reality but I am not sure the boys in Brussels are the ones most likely to bring about the reform. My guess is the people would just blame them when it became evident that half a year on holiday and retirement at 40 was not realistic in the long term.
The French need to come to this realization on their own. If they ever do.
May 29, 2005 - 5:16 pm 37. Fausta:According to Le Figaro, the turnout was a record high: http://www.lefigaro.fr/referendum/20050528.FIG0118.html. This time, voter turnout was higher than for the 1992 Maastricht Treaty referendum.
May 29, 2005 - 5:17 pm 38. jedrury:This defeat is a sad commentary on the sublime arrogance of European politicians; emphasis on sublime. Back when this constitution was written, Valery Giscard d’Estaing, the formerly rejected haughty French aristocrat – think John Kerry to the 9th degree – pushed the draft through with the support of the European elites over the sensible objections of many in the EU. There is nothing cautious or piece meal about this document, the elites wanted the whole 300 + page document stuffed down the throats of the public. Some countries passed it with parliamentary approval; an undemocratic device. Chirac under deep populist pressure agreed to a national vote and ended up the loser. He now discards Raffarin as prime minister anointing le tres controversial Dominic de Villepin as his replacement. Arrogance + more arrogance = failure.
May 29, 2005 - 5:24 pm 39. Buddy Larsen:There’s certainly some paradox…the heavy ‘non’ by the socialists is a rejection of capitalism, but the Chirac theme of anti-angloism likewise got the boot. Looks like the French are pretty polarized within the ‘non’ vote. Instapundit has a bunch of links up; the estimable Chicagoboyz saying this is almost as good for the world as the Purple Fingers.
May 29, 2005 - 5:28 pm 40. PeterUK:Terrye,
If you examine the enormous Ponzi scheme that is the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU,it is lamentably obvious that getting the French leech out of the bloodstream of European taxpayers is impossible.Not only is Fritz standing alone at the altar but he is paying the rent on Marianne’s family farm, a wooden leg for the three legged cow and Grandmamma’s false teeth.
I could provide figures but they are too depressing,suffice it to say that every man woman and child in the EU pays more for their food so that France’s peasant farmers can live in bucolic simpliicity.Meanwhile third world farmers cannot sell their produce and the EU dumps surpluses undercutting them.I’m all right Jacques indeed.
May 29, 2005 - 5:33 pm 41. Rick Ballard:Terrye,
The EU has been an economic Potemkin village for years. There is nothing that Brussels can do that can keep the member states from lying on a continual basis wrt to their deficits. With the birth rate below replacement, Europeans are in a race to live as well as they can ’til the power goes out. That’s still about 20-30 years away but the demographic trendline shows no sign of any improvement. In ten years you’ll be able to pick up a retirement villa in the south of France at a very reasonable price. You might want to study Arabic for a bit so you can speak to the locals.
May 29, 2005 - 5:40 pm 42. Sandy P:Via EU Referendum:
Apparently, according to the Financial Times, a tattered European Union flag had been lowered to half mast in the heart of the Brussels’ EU quarter even before the French polls closed at 10pm last night.
And
“The French of Overseas Territories have massively abstained from voting”Ö
Which may be Jacko’s ace calling for another vote
And
Chirac on TV_
You have expressed your sovereign will.
France will remain within the union. Will play its full role in the union.
We are faced with important events. I will defend our country’s stance 16th June (when meeting other heads of states/governments)
We have to gather together and defend national interests.
May 29, 2005 - 5:40 pm 43. Catherine:Oh sorry—-he meant Chirac.
He just had a meeting with . . . I FORGET.
Some high-level somebody in the French ministery of defense I think.
It seems to be a universally held belief in France that the ‘non’ on the EU is a non on Chirac (which I think lots of folks have been saying here—–)
May 29, 2005 - 5:43 pm 44. Sandy P:It’s those “national interests” that drive US nuts.
May 29, 2005 - 5:45 pm 45. chuck:After a telephone conversation with Mr Chirac, Gerhard Schrˆder, the German chancellor, said: ìThe outcome of the referendum is a setback for the constitutional process, but not its end. Neither is it the end of the Franco-German relationship in and for Europe.î
Poor Fritz is still convinced that deep in her heart Marianne truly loves him. Or so her father says. The foolish girl just doesn’t know it.
May 29, 2005 - 5:47 pm 46. Fausta:Instapundit has a reader’s comment saying, Reader Jonathan Smith emails: “I have yet to see an american blogger that has recognized that a lot of people that voted Non want France to be a MORE socialist state. It’s a fear that the EU will be more capitalist.”
Last month (http://badhairblog.blogspot.com/2005/04/is-jacques-losing-sleep-maybe.html and http://badhairblog.blogspot.com/2005/04/revolt-brews-in-france-as-this-story.html) I was discussing this aspect, since many hope a rejection of the constitution would bring about a realization that the “French economic model” is not working, but I also linked to a post by EUReferendum blog http://eureferendum.blogspot.com who believes that
. If there was any chance of EU politicians facing up to reality, they would not have attempted to foist the constitution on us in the first place. Collectively, they have been living in their own ‘bubble’ for over fifty years, and a little thing like a rejection is not going to change it.
For what it’s worth, Giscard d’Estaing went on the record saying if there’s a No, they’ll just have another referendum.
Seems to me that EUReferendum’s right.
May 29, 2005 - 5:49 pm 47. PeterUK:Rick,
You are right when you call the EU a Potemkin village.Behind the Pound stands the British Government,behind the Dollar stands the American Government,no government stands behind the Euro,it is an orphan child,everyone just hopes that Fritz will keep picking up the tab.
May 29, 2005 - 5:49 pm 48. Catherine:PeterUK
Well, I avoided getting into any kind of squabble about this with my husband, since the fact is I don’t know anything about France.
But I certainly feel as you do.
I feel that the French are voting ‘right’ no matter what their stated reasons . . . & no matter what the analysis made of their vote by elites.
This feels like a bit of a purple finger day to me as well, in its way.
We have friends in France, and listening to them told me that they were quite unhappy with the way things were developing, although I probably shouldn’t be a lot more detailed than this. I will say, though, that they were especially unhappy with the relentless march toward bringing Turkey in as a full member.
They told us that no one in France was in favor of this, and that no one in France seemed to have any say in the matter at all. Chirac was determined to bring Turkey in, and that was that.
They may have voted for the constitution; I don’t know.
But they weren’t happy, and for real reasons.
The ‘non to Chirac’ meme reminds me of all the What’s the Matter with Kansas? voter analysis that goes on around here. (Here meaning the Elite Media, not rogersimon.)
May 29, 2005 - 5:54 pm 49. chuck:Catherine,
It seems to be a universally held belief in France that the ‘non’ on the EU is a non on Chirac
That isn’t my impression. However, it is probably a good fallback rationalization for the governing bureaucrats. I hope your husband looks a bit deeper.
May 29, 2005 - 5:55 pm 50. Terrye:Rick and Peter:
I hear that the EU and China might be going to mix it up over textiles. It seems that corn is not the only problem the EU are going to have.
I think the US will give these subsidies up sooner or later. But it would be sooner if the EU did. It is kind of like two gun slingers standing there waiting to see who shoots first.
May 29, 2005 - 6:02 pm 51. chuck:Terrye,
I can’t quite figure out where I stand on farm subsidies. It is probably my deeply pessimistic view of human nature, but I am not at all sure that food production should be outsourced. I am not even sure it is a good idea to concentrate it in the midwest, California, and Florida. Maybe I am just paranoid?
May 29, 2005 - 6:06 pm 52. Fausta:Sandy P
“The French of Overseas Territories have massively abstained from voting”Ö
Which may be Jacko’s ace calling for another vote
Chirac would have (mixing metaphors here) to do a lot of tap dancing if that’s his ace. Considering the turnout in the mainland, http://www.lefigaro.fr/referendum/20050528.FIG0118.html, calling for another vote because the turnout in Martinique, Guadeloupe and Guyane was below 30% would be insane.
May 29, 2005 - 6:13 pm 53. PeterUK:Catherine,
There is only one fact that anyone needs to know about the EU,the auditors have refused to sign the accounts for seven years in a row.A private company would have the regulators in and the shareholders in revolt,but in the EU the taxpayer counts for nothing.
Chuck,
Marianne has been seen in the company of a swarthy gentleman of Middle Eastern appearance.
May 29, 2005 - 6:21 pm 54. Anthony (Los Angeles):For all the wrong reasons, the French electorate did the right thing. Just this once…
Vive le France.
May 29, 2005 - 6:21 pm 55. PeterUK:Fausta,
There was an article in the Telegraph by Henry Samuel 12:59 above,which mentions the bribery and blackmail that France perpetrated in the overseas territories.
Overseas Territories,were they not at one time called colonies,whats this, France still has an Empire?
May 29, 2005 - 6:30 pm 56. Rick Ballard:Chuck,
If you want a little trade whiplash read this piece and look at the cotton export number and then this piece concerning textile import limits and cotton subsidies.
Why are we subsidizing Chinese mills?
Anyone concerned about family farms wrt cotton can worry about something else – this ain’t 40 acres and a mule, it’s 4,000 acres and a Lear – check out the payouts in the second link if you have doubts.
May 29, 2005 - 6:40 pm 57. c:For all the wrong reasons, the French electorate did the right thing. Just this once…
Right, Anthony! Even ‘The Mirror’ might wonder how millions of French voters can be so smart?
May 29, 2005 - 6:44 pm 58. chuck:Overseas Territories,were they not at one time called colonies,whats this, France still has an Empire?
Help me, information, more than that I cannot add
Only that I miss her and all the fun we had
…
I’m sure the colonies all love the humble and loving Marriane. Ask the Ivory Coast, they cheered like crazy when the empire struck back. Snort.
May 29, 2005 - 6:48 pm 59. Kevin P:Roger:
I think the “the no vote was a reflection on Chirac” is a bit of a smokescreen to hide the fact that they just think there is something wrong with the constitution. The left and the right have different reasons but it might actually be the case that they looked at that unwieldy bureaucrats wet dream and said screw it. And even though it is rarely stated there might actually be some folks in europe who like the idea of the nation state.
May 29, 2005 - 6:52 pm 60. chuck:this ain’t 40 acres and a mule, it’s 4,000 acres and a Lear
I ain’t worried about the family farm, I’m worried about starving when the transportation system collapses. Could happen, you know. Happened in Europe 60 years ago, and they were in better shape to survive such circumstance than many regions of the US. Told you I was paranoid.
May 29, 2005 - 6:54 pm 61. richard mcenroe:“The French of Overseas Territories have massively abstained from voting”Ö
Can you imagine Kerry saying, “This election isn’t final until we hear from Guam?”
May 29, 2005 - 6:58 pm 62. PeterUK:Chuck,
“Long Distance Infatuation”?
May 29, 2005 - 7:08 pm 63. chuck:One Yes supporter appeared close to tears and said he was ashamed to be French – that “certain large rival nations”, referring to Britain, would be “laughing and rubbing their hands at what we have done”.
Must say I enjoy the picture of the Brits rubbing their hands together and chortling happily to themselves. Even better, I look forward to pictures of French people looking sad and making apologies to Europe. Won’t happen, I know.
May 29, 2005 - 7:29 pm 64. Buddy Larsen:Canned goods, Chuck. Wired home from South America when USSR went into Afghanistan and paniced the wife into buying a ton of canned goods. Man, that was a lotta beans and chili to sheepishly eat over the following decade.
May 29, 2005 - 7:38 pm 65. PeterUK:Chuck,
We British would never gloa although there was a similar reaction from the French in 1815.
May 29, 2005 - 7:45 pm 66. Rick Ballard:Peter,
One can imagine Nelson and Wellington with amused smiles.
May 29, 2005 - 8:16 pm 67. Ray:China Syndrome II
Chirac’s personal loss in this election is not much different than Schroeder’s recent battering in Germany. Both are trying to avoid the fiscal disadvantages of systems that promise too much and face not being able to deliver the cushy benefits as promised. High wages, free medical, six week vacations and thirty five hour work weeks don’t cut it when your competitor is China, where over 200 million recieve less than $1.00 U.S. per day.
France and Germany are about to experience what some call “agonizing reappraisal” when they find that their products are no longer competitive in the international marketplace. They may decide not to buy the cheap products coming out of the Orient, however, they will not sell their own overpriced goods to the world market.
Chirac is also going to find that his virulent anti-American rethoric is no longer going to win any friends or elections.
The China Syndrome II meltdown is about to begin.
May 29, 2005 - 8:25 pm 68. PeterUK:Rick,
I should imagine they are both turning in their graves at the sight of this slippery,slimy conniving,second rate snake oil salesmen.
May 29, 2005 - 8:25 pm 69. PeterUK:BTW Does anyone else think that France backing the admission of Turkey into the EU was the payoff for refusing the US access during OIF?
http://www.turks.us/article.php?story=20030424080726319
May 29, 2005 - 8:32 pm 70. Buddy Larsen:That’s a couple of names with a fair gravitas about them.
May 29, 2005 - 8:32 pm 71. Buddy Larsen:Nelson and Wellington, not France and Turkey, tho by the time I post this it’ll probably be referring to Peanut Butter and Jelly.
May 29, 2005 - 8:36 pm 72. Buddy Larsen:Bur seriously, Peter, yes, that idea has been around, that Turkey’s otherwise inexplicable about-face had to do with EU entry. Chirac. OFF. What a story, it’s really huge. Think what NYT could do, giving it the Abu Graib treatment. The dirty dogs.
May 29, 2005 - 8:42 pm 73. chuck:I find it curious that Brittany was the only major region of France to vote oui.
Peter,
I like the way The Sun covers the vote. But then, I like the way The Sun covers anything to do with France.
Ray,
Wonder what will happen when the celebratory non voters discover that nothing has been solved? The constitution was bad in itself, but voting against it will not solve the economic problems of Old Europe. The problems have less to do with Bruselles than with the French polity.
May 29, 2005 - 8:47 pm 74. Rick Ballard:Peter,
I doubt that. We’re speaking of the French here. What other conduct would Nelson or Wellington have expected? Or were you referring to Tony?
Wrt Turkey – I agree, but why should the Turks escape French perfidy?
Buddy,
The NYT would be all over it if we could get Chirac to change his name to Bush.
May 29, 2005 - 8:48 pm 75. thibaud_:A cautionary note here: the most implacable French opponents of the constitution are also the most anti-American and anti-capitalist. OTOH my take is that what they are rejecting is the notion of a more “competitive” EU, ie one that will liberalize its labor markets and thereby grow fast enough to truly challenge the US in the strategic and international realm. So it’s a vote against not just Americanization but also the EU elites’ dreams of superpower grandeur.
The EU elites have entirely misread the public. The prevailing mood in Germany, Italy, Holland and France is one of frustration and disappointment with the political class. Kaletsky is right that unemployment and stagnation explain much of this, but my colleagues and friends in France and Italy also indicate a strong belief that the elites are focused on grand ambitions in the international sphere, to the exclusion of domestic needs.
It’s a bit like the pro-Perot mood we saw in the US in 1991-92 and to a lesser extent in the runup to the NAFTA debate. Ordinary Europeans who do not work for multinationals or for the EU do not have any interest in the grand project to make the EU into a superpower rival to the US. They want what most people in most countries want: greater economic security.
Continental west Europeans perceive, correctly, that to the extent the EU elites pursue their chimera of an economically-competitive EU that can and will stand up to the US, there will be less economic security for ordinary Europeans.
The people get it: can’t challenge the hyperpower without becoming more like the hyperpower. Setting out to preserve the distinctly unAmerican nature of the EU against a supposedly rapacious US hyperpower, the EU elites will have to scale back EU social policies.
The illogic of the EU’s amerophobic mission is coming around to bite them in the ass. Most Europeans are simply asking why it’s not enough for Europe to be quietly prosperous, peaceful and a minor player on the world stage. Can’t say I blame ‘em.
Bottom line: Europe’s giving up grand international ambitions and going to focus on internal needs for a long time to come. Not such a bad thing for the world. Certainly a good thing for US interests.
May 29, 2005 - 9:54 pm 76. thibaud_:Chirac is a corrupt old hack who’s been clogging up the French political system for over a quarter century. It’s utterly absurd that this reptile is still in power, let alone scheming until recently to extend his term to fifteen years in office. Imagine if last November we Americans had to choose between Jimmy Carter and Dick Nixon, and you get a sense of how frustrated and enraged the average Frenchman is with the old hacks who dominate French politics.
The notion of an EU superpower was always idiotic to begin with. The goal was to create a more socialist-inclined challenger to the US that could resist the US in the international as well as economic realms. Well, for that you need growth north of the 3 percent p.a. range. Which means you need liberalized labor markets, deregulation, and real competition on the, er, American model. In other words, the geniuses who conceived of the EU “moral superpower” never considered that to preserve the EU welfare state it would be necessary to destroy it.
The contradiction became obvious when the EU expanded eastward, embracing flat-tax, freewheeling newly capitalist nations that have 5 percent plus growth. OF COURSE the French people, had anyone bothered to ask them, would never consent to compete with Poles on a level playing field. Let alone Turks.
If the French want social protection, slow growth and international irrelevance, then fine with me. Keep it quaint, untouched by Walmarts and efficiency, a tourist’s dream. Poverty is very picturesque.
May 29, 2005 - 10:07 pm 77. Charlie (Colorado):Its worth remembering that Chirac *has* to keep the Presidency as long as he can; otherwise he becomes vulnerable to the prosecution that could very well put him in the slammer. So he may be damaged goods, but don’t expect him to resign.
May 29, 2005 - 10:36 pm 78. Sandy P:Don’t bet the farm on Sarkozy.
A frenchman at Rantburg explained that Sarkozy’s wife’s been fooling around on him.
It’s acceptable for a pol to fool around, but the spouse, they don’t like so much.
May 29, 2005 - 11:00 pm 79. Sandy P:–BTW Does anyone else think that France backing the admission of Turkey into the EU was the payoff for refusing the US access during OIF?—
Wayyyy old news, Peter.
Yup.
Then they screwed them, like those weasels do. So, Turkey lost the billions, our trust and the elite sniffed of course, non, they’re not joining.
I’m sure Rantburg’s got it in the archives. Run-up to Iraq.
May 29, 2005 - 11:04 pm 80. Sandy P:—One Yes supporter appeared close to tears and said he was ashamed to be French – that “certain large rival nations”, referring to Britain, would be “laughing and rubbing their hands at what we have done”.
Must say I enjoy the picture of the Brits rubbing their hands together and chortling happily to themselves. Even better, I look forward to pictures of French people looking sad and making apologies to Europe. Won’t happen, I know.—
There’s going to be a run on tranqs tomorrow.
25% of their population is already on them.
May 29, 2005 - 11:05 pm 81. Steve M:As has been pointed out, many in France rejected the constitution because they believe that it reeks of ‘Anglo-Saxon capitalism’ and they would like it to be more socialist.
The fools actually blame the free market for the current decline in their economy.
Here in the UK, we are unlikely to ratify the constitution (if we’re given a vote on it). Making it ‘more socialist’ would make it even less appealing to a post-Thatcherite Britain. In fact I cannot conceive of any variation of this constitution that would appeal to both Britain and France.
It also seems that it is now unlikely that we will be allowed to hold our referendum. This is very unfortunate. We in the UK should be given a chance to discuss and vote on a deeply unpopular EU. I can see much resentment arising otherwise.
Anyway, I very much hope that this is the beginning of the end for the EU Federalist juggernaut and the start of a move toward a looser affiliation of free-trading nations.
May 30, 2005 - 12:52 am 82. WichitaBoy:—One Yes supporter appeared close to tears and said he was ashamed to be French – that “certain large rival nations”, referring to Britain, would be “laughing and rubbing their hands at what we have done”.
I ask you: could there possibly be a starker demonstration of why the EU makes no sense? Vote yes for a greater union with Britain in order to put it in Britain’s eye? Britain as “rival nation”, so join closer with Britain and the other “rival nations”? Pfui.
May 30, 2005 - 1:31 am 83. HA:Austin Bay has made the definitive comment on this referendum result:
It’s clear that a disgruntled and discombobulated French electorate expressed various types of outrage and enrage (an odd construction but given France’s constant straddling act, strikes me as appropirate). However, if the Communist Redshirts and Le Pen’s fascist Brownshirts are politically determinative in France – and that’s an argument one can make based on this plebiscite – then let’s recognize France as the politically sick society it truly is. If “sick” is a push word and too therapeutic for the pragmatic set, then call it the “lost” society. In some ways the news that the Cold War really is over has finally reached Paris.
The investment the French elite had in this referendum is revealing. They know that France is a very sick patient indeed. They were counting on being able to leech off the rest of the EUSSR to alleviate the symptoms of their statist disease.
The French elite have been projecting that the EUSSR would be a French jockey on a German horse. For me, a different image comes to mind. That of a delusional French geriatric supported by European gurney. Yesterday, driven by fading memories of youthful glory, the French patient ripped out its IV, stumbled off its gurney, and staggered down the corrider in search of its lost youth. The collapse is coming the the French uber-hommes know it. And – to paraphrase – the “masses” as usual, know nothing.
May 30, 2005 - 4:40 am 84. Buddy Larsen:See the red/blue map.
May 30, 2005 - 4:48 am 85. Buddy Larsen:I’m sorry, the map is here: link
May 30, 2005 - 4:56 am 86. Buddy Larsen:Peter, got any ideas why Brittany is “blue”?
May 30, 2005 - 5:10 am 87. chuck:Peter, got any ideas why Brittany is “blue”?
My guess is that the countryside in Brittany is still Celtic — they play the bagpipes and such — and perhaps see themselves benefiting from a looser association with France. The St. Malo area went red, however, perhaps more real ‘French’ live there?
May 30, 2005 - 5:58 am 88. chuck:Sandy P,
The US was the one pushing Turkish inclusion in the EU against the opposition of the EU core. That is why the Turkish volte-face made even less sense to me. All those ‘lets bring in the Turks’ noises from France and Germany were too timely to take seriously.
May 30, 2005 - 6:21 am 89. Buddy Larsen:That’s right…forgotten now is the US effort to publicise Turkey as a model of an Islamic democracy that the west needed to recognize and respond to. Maybe if USA wants Turkey in the EU, it ought to campaign against its inclusion.
May 30, 2005 - 6:27 am 90. Fausta:Le Monde’s map http://www.lemonde.fr/web/vi/0,47-0@2-631760,54-655042@51-656094,0.html shows that even in Ile-de-Frence,4 districs voted no.
Last week Sarkozy went on TV to answer questions about his marriage (and said the usual “like all marriages . . .” stuff). He also held rallies for his UMP supporters. This morning Le Monde’s saying, http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-631760,36-655966@51-639952,0.html Jacques Chirac dÈfait, Nicolas Sarkozy pose ses conditions, Chirac defeated, Sarkozy states his conditions.
French news watching: more fun than ever!
May 30, 2005 - 6:52 am 91. jedrury:We in the US are at least made aware of the China syndrome. There are books and article written about it weekly; even Tom Friedman in his latest book – The World is Flat – dwells on it. We as a people try to react to self examination and criticism. The China onslaught is not an exclusive American issue, it has a major impact on Europe business. The huge German unemployment problem which sparked the latest Schroeder election defeat can be laid at least partially on the shift of manufacturing to China; e.g., machine tool and die manufacturers and automobiles, etc. German industry can not placate its unions and sustain its social safety network without radical economical and social restructuring. The American military abandonment of bases in Germany is an added worry. The same can be said for France – except it has seemingly better adapted with its aircraft manufacturing and supportive business and governmental alliances and policies. The economic problems are structural and deep seated. The rejection of the European constitution is a manifestation of European angst. That the French rejected the constitution is a positive sign: democracy – for better or worse – works; people, not the elites, act for themselves and determine their own destiny, a quality Americans are fully familiar with.
May 30, 2005 - 6:53 am 92. Captain Hate:Will the currency in France still be the euro or are the franc printing presses working feverishly as I type this?
May 30, 2005 - 6:57 am 93. Buddy Larsen:I think the experts are expecting the EU to proceed indefinitely on the provisional basis.
May 30, 2005 - 7:05 am 94. chuck:jedrury,
except it has seemingly better adapted with its aircraft manufacturing and supportive business and governmental alliances and policies.
I noticed somewhere in browsing the French election results that Airbus wanted another 600K pounds in subsidies so that it could continue to compete, so the aerospace industry may be less competitive than appears.
My own impression of German goods, based on a few personal experiences, is that the quality is going down. This can’t help manufacturing in a country that relies on its reputation for high quality.
May 30, 2005 - 7:09 am 95. Terrye:Buddy:
Not only did the US want Turkey in the EU, it is a long standing desire of both political parties here in the US to see Turkey have clser ties with the West. So for America it was not really a partisan debate. Unless it has now become one. Sometimes it seems that everything has become part of a partisan debate.
May 30, 2005 - 7:15 am 96. PeterUK:Sandy P,
Never the less Chirac’s support of Turkey’s entry into the EU lost him votes.
Brittany is fairly rural farming country and probably had an eye on the CAP subsidies.St Malo is urban.
Most in Eurpoe recognise that trying to absorb Turkey into the EU would be a bigger disaster than German reunification.It is impossible to have a welfare state and open borders.
Anyone who has been to Turkey will know that there is much grinding poverty so that unless there were huge fiscal transfers there would be a influx of those who would be entitled to housing,medical care and benefits.The infrastucture could not withstand this nor is it designed to.
The canard that demographically Europe is on the decline and needs more people is disproved by the very high unemployment rate,especially amongst immigrant communities.
The belief that the welfare state will be paid for by immigration ignores the fact that immigrants also get sick and become old.Figures have been produced which show there is only a very slight or even negative net gain to this concept.
Turkey would be better off in a Middle East Union,if such a thing is desirable,with Iraq,Lebanon and Israel,Kuwait and perhaps a reformed Syria.
May 30, 2005 - 7:15 am 97. Coisty:You are absolutely right Peter. Anyone familiar with immigrant communities in Europe knows that they take at least as much from the state as they contribute to it. The US seems to have an immigration policy designed to destroy its own working class population’s ability to survive. Luckily Europeans are more cognizant of the need to restrict low skill immigrants (the only kind Europe seems to attract!) and so in a way the threat of Turkish membership has been a blessing in disguise. It has concentrated European minds on the demographic threat and increased hostility towards the increasingly arrogant EU elite.
Incidentally, the Japanese have decided to tackle their demographic problems by putting more effort into robotisation (not sure if that’s a word) in order to avoid the social problems that always come with importing alien peoples. Europe and the US should follow their lead.
May 30, 2005 - 7:39 am 98. Buddy Larsen:Tend to agree, but can’t help but think, there but for the grace of timing would sit me, up some fjord without a paddle, scraping a herring for breakfast.
May 30, 2005 - 7:47 am 99. ricpic:A point from someone (me) who doesn’t know the details but has a “sense” of what Europe is all about:
The notion that Europe will commit suicide is overblown. It’s true that nations, even regions, have golden ages and then decline. But it is impossible for me to believe that the race (ooh, I’m commiting the ultimate sin) that has been far and away the most dynamic in world history will allow itself to be swept away by the folly of politically-correct-socialism run amuck. Muslim immigration will be checked (imperfectly, but checked) and the drag effect of monstrously oversized government will be lessened. This will all be done in the face of fierce resistance but it will be done. Europe is not fatalistic. It is not the East. Europe will revive.
May 30, 2005 - 7:58 am 100. Buddy Larsen:ricpic, it certainly won’t if they–we–believe it won’t. As you imply, Europe is people, not a thing.
May 30, 2005 - 8:43 am 101. David Thomson:ìThe notion that Europe will commit suicide is overblown.î
No, it is not. The indigenous Europeans are not producing enough children. That factor alone dooms them.
May 30, 2005 - 10:09 am 102. Kevin P:Roger:
The non vote is a trip but the E.U. constitution will trudge on and eventually be implemented. The fact that Brussels is shielded from democratic checks and balances allows them to ignore the vote. I have read that there will be no renogiation and if there are any changes they will just be on the edges.They are not going to scrap the constitutiion.Other then possible changes within the french government, what will specifically change in Brusells?
What happens down the line when the French realize that even though they are given power in the EU beyond what they deserve that they are not in total control of it will they pull a DeGaulle redux and pull out of it? For a fine example of french arrogance and denial read Ernest R. May’s “Strange Victory” Different circ umstances, same problem.
May 30, 2005 - 12:10 pm 103. chuck:A postmortem and thoughts on the future at Eursoc.
May 30, 2005 - 12:24 pm 104. Kevin P:Roger:
If someone reads this thread and claims the anti-French mood is another example of silly American chauvanism they should take note of this. Although the LA Times did not give the specifics two French researchers asked Europeans to give adjectives that described the French character. The countries surveyed were Britain, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Nethherlands, Spain and Sweden. The returns were overwhelmingly negative. These were some of the top responses. Pretentious, haughty, vain, snobbish, arrogant, chauvinistic, neocolonial, self-obsessed, stubborn, disobediant, humourless, rightous, preachy, cold, distant, impolite, frivolous, shallow, agitated, disorganized, talkative, carnal, immoral, out of touch egocentric bon vivants, nannied, dirty. And they thought freedom fries was out of line.
May 30, 2005 - 12:55 pm 105. Jamie Irons:This is a terrific discussion!
I really appreciate getting informed here.
I have been all too ignorant about Europe.
Thanks!
Jamie Irons
May 30, 2005 - 1:02 pm 106. Occam's Beard:“Elie Cohen, director of research at the National Centre for Scientific Research, …
…predicted France would become more euro-sceptical and a “prickly negotiating partner” in the decisions facing Europe this year, including the start of membership talks with Turkey.”
Become??
May 30, 2005 - 2:13 pm 107. richard mcenroe:The Daily Telegraph on The EU Vote
May 30, 2005 - 2:40 pm 108. jedrury:The BBC reports tonight the following:
1.) Raffarin out, de Villepin in.
2.) Chirac on TV Tuesday to address the nation.
3.) A generally positive spin despite the “non” vote. The French elites proclaiming “we vote again in 2006 or 7.”
4.) French “non” vote is anti globalisation, anti free market.
Quick Smart Ass American Analysis:
1.) De Villepin has not been elected to office EVER. Poets don’t shake hands.
2.) Blah, blah, oui, non, blah, blah, moi, moi.
3.) Has anyone heard about democracy? These referendums do not go into extra innings.
4.) France can just seal off its borders and not let in the outside world to achieve a closed market economy. Silly unrealistic Sorbonne Left Bank musing.
May 30, 2005 - 3:31 pm 109. PeterUK:richard mcenroe.
The EU was designed by 19th century men to solve an early 20th century problem.There is not the remotest chance of there ever being another war like WWI or WWII in Europe,unless the Russians decided to roll over a feeble EU.The world has changed immeasurabley since the time of Monnet and Schuman,the middlec lasses are much larger,unless they can be coopted or bribed they will not stand for an elite controlling the every deyail of their lives,socialism or no.It is all so very 1789.
May 30, 2005 - 3:38 pm 110. Rick Ballard:“It is all so very 1789.”
Dateline – Paris – 2008
A modern day Madame LaFarge sat placidly knitting in the shadow of the guillotine as the tumbrel bearing Chirac and DeVillepin approached the Place de Concorde…
What a frisson of anticipation is created just in thinking of Paris in 1789.
May 30, 2005 - 4:30 pm 111. PeterUK:Rick,
Of course you know it was all America’s fault,the French who had fought in the American revolutionary War went back home to find that they were in a far worse social position than those living in America.In France they were still serfs.
Copuld the guillotine be located in Brussels, not the same I know,but handier?
May 30, 2005 - 5:26 pm 112. Rick Ballard:Peter,
Comes the day, I believe they’ll be sprouting all over Brussels.
May 30, 2005 - 5:48 pm 113. PeterUK:Rick,
Ah yes! Gallant little Belgium.
May 30, 2005 - 6:04 pm 114. jedrury:Two points stemming from the report in the New York Times. The eye popping numbers underscore the deep seated suspicion in the electorate:
” 70 percent of farmers voted no, despite the fact that France is the largest recipient of European Union farm subsidies – $11.7 billion euros in 2004, or one-fifth of the Union’s agricultural budget.
Public-sector and blue-collar workers and the unemployed, all low-pay groups vulnerable in a country with more than 10 percent unemployment, voted no by large margins, between 60 and 79 percent.
Although most of the Socialist Party hierarchy lobbied in favor of the constitution, 56 percent of Socialist voters rejected it. On the political extremes, 98 percent of the Communist Party and 93 percent of the extreme right National Front voted no.
Paris and Lyon, France’s two biggest cities, and pro-European regions like Alsace, Brittany and the Loire Valley voted yes, while rural France and smaller cities and towns voted no. Most surprisingly, 55 percent of young people from the ages of 18 to 25 rejected the constitution, underscoring the lack of trust in the future of France.”
Chirac’s presumed political wisdom has to be questioned after this report from the Times.
“De Villepin is considered the front-runner, but he is not liked by much of the French political establishment, including deputies in Parliament, who consider him distant from the people and complain that he does not bother to consult them.
A CSA opinion poll for France 3 television showed that Mr. Sarkozy, the most popular politician on the right, was the public’s choice with 25 percent of voters wanting him to become prime minister. Only 11 percent favor Mr. De Villepin.”
May 30, 2005 - 6:06 pm 115. Buddy Larsen:Sarkozy is said to be–zoot alores–”pro-American. Can zis be?
May 30, 2005 - 7:01 pm