I realize that local politics is becoming a central topic of this blog. That wasn't the original intent, and therefore I have decided to move my political blogging to another venue. I just got the www.concerntroll.com domain, and I will soon start posting political stuff over there.
OK. I never thought I'd ever write something like that. This is so fucking funny. For some reason it always seems to happen to sanctimonious right-wing Christian authoritarians. I mean if this turns out to be even 10% true, we are officially entering J. Edgar Hoover territory.
Your Right Hand Thief has the story. Wonkette and Jay Leno went national with it:
"The darling of the religious right, conservative Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, not only admitted to having sex with prostitutes, he would pay them $300 to make him wear diapers. And today that crazy astronaut called him 'my dream guy, he's got my vote!" --Jay LenoTo be perfectly honest, it seems that there are somewhat contradictory accounts - obviously, it will be hard to establish the entire truth here, given the shady characters involved (the Madam, the Senator and the prostitute). And perhaps goons will be sent to make everyone shut up. This is the Bayou after all.
You need help! It's your shield, it's your whatever... Rudy knows a creep when he hears one...
And tomorrow: Argentina meets Brazil. This is a dream match. Lionel Messi, Carlos Tevez, Hernan Crespo (possibly) and Juan Roman Riquelme against a young Auriverde squad featuring the amazing Robinho. WOW. Oh and let me commit that to the hard drive: 3-2 Argentina.
Someone I know who left New York once told me that most New Yorkers positively hate Rudy Giuliani. Some of this might explain why.
Update:
A few quick remarks. Although the whole video is supposed to be for members of the Union, they really could have dispensed with the long, drawn-out preamble.The most devastating moment is the snippet of his appearance before the 9/11 commission. I hope someone splices the thing down to 50 seconds - defective radios, no bid contracts, couldn't hear the evacuation order, and then Rudy claiming that firefighters decided to stand their ground.
In light of that I thought the shot of Rudy running was perhaps not that necessary. It's as if they weren't sure they had enough stuff with the no-bid contracts for defective radios, the successful evacuation of NYPD people vs. the 141 firefighters who didn't hear the order, and the gold vs. firefighters' remains. I mean they really did not need the cheap shots of Rudy running.
Besides, the fact that Rudy was outside should have been emphasized more - there's only one mention of NYC emergency HQ being in the general area. The fact that Rudy was running around outside with members of the press is precisely because he had nowhere to go - since he had ordered the emergency HQ to be located in the WTC, against the advice of the NYPD and the FDNY. So they could have done a better job with that.
Rudy really, really gets on my nerves
Those geniuses are finally coming around to acknowledge the obvious.
"It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit."And that one:
"While Mr. Bush scorns deadlines, he kept promising breakthroughs — after elections, after a constitution, after sending in thousands more troops. But those milestones came and went without any progress toward a stable, democratic Iraq or a path for withdrawal. It is frighteningly clear that Mr. Bush’s plan is to stay the course as long as he is president and dump the mess on his successor. Whatever his cause was, it is lost."Duh.
I couldn't say it better than Glenn Greenwald today:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/06/22/water_electric/index.html
"We continue to prop up the Middle East's most brutal dictators and support those leaders who lose in democratic elections, while righteously pretending that our invasions, occupations and bombing campaigns are about spreading democracy (we're delivering "God's gift to every man, woman and child"). And the raging debates in our country are over the extent to which we should torture people and how many more Muslims we should lock away for life with no charges of any kind.
The next time there is a terrorist attack, we can all sit around bewildered, scratching our heads and solemnly asking: "Why do they hate us?" And the only answer that will be allowed -- a rule to be piously enforced by the Owner of 9/11 himself, Rudy Giuliani -- will be the extremely honest and illuminating: "They hate us for our freedoms."
Check out the Romneys. They are so wholesome. Ann is particularly cool: she marvels at the fact that had it not been for Mitt's presidential campaign she'd never have set foot in 'some of the Southern States...' And all these Republican activists who are 'amazing' because they 'really care.' She truly speaks like the country club society lady she is: her disdain for the political activists is both completely genuine and refreshingly unselfconscious. The whole production is so weirdly off it is hilarious. Like that shot of the Romney men playing hoops. And don't forget: Mitt's all time favorite book is... Battlefield Earth, by Lafayette Ron Hubbard (yes, that L.R.Hubbard).
I'm telling you, this crop of Republican candidates is a comedic masterpiece. After the balding tough guy who loves stiletto heels so much he can't stop himself from wearing them, we've got the Romneys who are, well - how to say that delicately? - whiter than white bread?
See this excellent article by B. Chazelle at Rootless Cosmopolitan. This is as strong a rebuttal as you will find of George Will's column in today's WaPo. Will's views are so wrong on so many levels, and rehash the old saws of intellectual conservatism (Burke, Daniel Bell), that one does not know where to begin... At least, Chazelle's views are pretty useful in that regards.
It's not like it's such an exciting news, but yes he will win. My best guess is something like 53%-47%. Could be even higher. The votes are just not there for Royal, and Sarkozy is very, very good at retail politics. He made a lot of promises to many different constituencies, and he was convincing enough to get the support of both the disenfranchised and the upper class. He will abolish the inheritance tax AND lower the exchange rate of the Euro. Guess which one he will be able to accomplish. But as we say in France, promises only bind those who believe in them... Even if I find the whole thing baffling, I must admit that the alternative was not exactly thrilling either.
In the grand scheme of things, it does not matter that much. It is only France after all. It's a very nice vacation spot, especially for all the foodies and other wine enthusiasts out there. Ahh, Anne Gros, Bernard Pacaud and Joël Robuchon... Culture and all that - not so hot. Great indie filmmakers. Awesome trains, too. And Manu Chao.
OK, there's a weird poll out there done by an outsourcing shop in Tunisia (see it here and here), that gives Royal at 25% and the three others (Sarko, Bayrou and Le Pen) between 17% and 20%... I don't buy it - their assumption is that Le Pen will draw a lot of voters away from Sarkozy. I don't think so. But then again, we might be in for a huge surprise on Sunday. It would not be the first time the pollsters are so completely wrong...
Of note: there's been a slight uptick in Royal contracts at Intrade.com - perhaps this is a harbinger of a 1st round shocker. Intrade is pretty good (and still gives Sarkozy as the likely winner by an impossibly high margin.)
I will make a prediction for the record, and for the hell of it:
Sarko: 29%
Royal: 24%
Bayrou: 17%
Le Pen: 17%
Two polls released today yield a tie between Royal and Sarkozy in the runoff election. Is that realistic? Is that possible? Should Royal supporters rejoice? I am not a polling expert, but from what I understand, trends matter more than actual poll numbers. In that regard, there seems to be a slight uptick in favor of Royal in the past week or so. It is hard to say if this is noise or a key reversal. If anything, it points to the inability of the polling outfits to figure out France's electorate. Libération pins this volatility on the "popular classes" which are usually much less engaged in politics, and therefore much less likely to identify with a party (let alone an ideology).
Let's take a quick look at the numbers (summary of the CSA poll here - the changes are compared to the previous CSA poll).
1st round
Sarkozy: 27% (+1)
Royal: 25% (+2)
Bayrou: 19% (-2)
Le Pen: : 15,5% (+0.5)
Other left-wing: 10,5% (+0.5%)
Other right-wing: 3% (-0.5%)
2nd round
Sarkozy: 50%
Royal: 50%
Sarkozy: 46%
Bayrou: 54%
The way the get to that result is mystifying. If you add Royal+left-wing+1/3 Bayrou, she's still stuck at around 41%. If you assume 1/2 of Bayrou's voters come from the Socialist Party, then she's at around 44%. Again, the only way Royal pushes Sarkozy into a close race is if she makes a serious dent in Le Pen's constituency (the 15.5% is I think somewhat underweighted, perhaps by 2%). Possible, but unlikely.
Most other polls (including one released today/wednesday in Paris) give a 51/49 in favor of Sarkozy. So it all points to tightening of the race. The key for Royal will be to score very well in the first round, so as to create a sense of momentum in public opinion.
I don't see how Bayrou gets to the second round. The numbers and the trend are pointing to a third-place finish. The real question is whether he will negotiate something with the Socialists or fall back to his no-no position (which would be the same as tacitly endorsing Sarkozy). One should remember that his party - however tiny - largely depends on right-wing voters and the UMP apparatus. If he goes in with Royal, a lot of his party members will be in danger of losing their seats in Parliament (especially if Sarkozy wins : the knives will be drawn, and whatever is left of the UDF will be on the chopping block). On top of that, what can he negotiate? They will need to present a governing platform and campaign together. Somehow, it doesn't seem possible. The Socialist party hacks won't stand for that - they'd rather lose than having to deal with Bayrou as prime minister and Royal as President for 5 years. That would not necessarily be a bad scenario for France, though. Bayrou is an honorable guy.
Intrade.com still predicts a Sarkozy win by a wide margin. I'd guess the 1st round will dramatically readjust the numbers.
More funny bits from Nicolas Sarkozy. I'm translating his remarks in Philosophie Magazine - yes, there is such a thing in France, and better yet, it has a readership large enough for the Sarkozy PR machine to actually send the boss for an interview. (As an aside, I wonder who are Philosophie Magazine's main advertisers : Patek Philippe? Viagra? Prozac? tour operators specializing in swingers?)
So here's what Sarkozy said to Michel Onfray. The interviewer is a somewhat famous French author - if you can imagine a male cross between the two Marthas (Stewart and Nussbaum). He's the kind of celebrity who utters weighty platitudes without a shred of self-doubt, and wraps them in what passes for elegance in the age of mass consumption. I guess he made Sarkozy feel well at-ease.
But, without further ado, straight from the horse's mouth (my translation):
"For my part, I am inclined to think that one is born a pedophile, and that it is a real problem that we do not know how to cure that pathology. There are 1200 or 1300 youth who commit suicide every year in France, it is not because their parents did not take good care of them! But because, genetically, there is a fragility, a preexisting pain (...) Circumstances are not everything, the role of what's innate is immense."
Besides the slightly comical bit on heredity and criminal pathology, which betrays a complete ignorance of even the most basic notions of modern genetics, I think the important point has to do with his critique of what he calls "circumstances." For a neo-liberal like Sarkozy, the link between criminality and social conditions must be severed at all costs. Because otherwise, the logical next step to reduce criminality is to promote and implement redistributive policies. Hence his critique of circumstances. Hence his not-so-subtle racialization of criminality (which also betrays a complete ignorance of population genetics, and a primitive understanding of phenotypical variations among humans). To Sarkozy, one does not become a pedophile or a suicidal teen or a petty criminal because of circumstances. Therefore, allocating resources to correct and transform "circumstances" is a huge waste of governmental monies. Sarkozy tried to pass a law last year that would mandate monitoring unruly kids in schools, in order to detect supposed criminal predispositions. This is true.
In a sense, Sarkozy adheres to the worst of sociobiology. He does not believe that government can alleviate social ills. In fact, he does not believe that there is a such a thing as socially-determined pathological behaviors. I'd bet that he'd have agreed with old Maggie Thatcher when she claimed that she did not know what society was.
Finally, Sarkozy's predisposition to privilege inherited traits is perfectly consistent with his political philosophy. He believes in Burke's "old customs and traditions." He believes in the "innate." He believes in abolishing the inheritance tax.
Yesterday, Jean-Marie Le Pen declared himself the candidate of the "terroir," as opposed to Nicolas Sarkozy, a "candidate who is coming from immigration." Charming.
This raises many questions for Sarkozy. After spending so much time and energy pointing fingers at immigrants, Sarkozy must now address the fact he himself is the son of an immigrant. This in fact is a golden opportunity for him : at first he can highlight that he is the living proof that the children of immigrants can succeed in France. And then he can also hint that while the son of an immigrant, his father was not "that" type of immigrants, times were different etc etc... This is virulent, and will certainly get him jeers on the left. But it's tactically correct if he wants to attract Le Pen's voters. Sarkozy is not one to shy away from political controversy - in fact, much like G.W. Bush, he thrives on it. Every other day he says something outrageous, that blurs the campaign's narrative and throws off his opponents (the ministry of immigration and national identity, the pedophilia gene, et. al.)
For now, his lieutenants are screaming that they are shocked, shocked at Jean-Marie Le Pen's remarks. That's the first phase. Next, Sarko himself will intervene.
Read the article - it's pretty funny.
Plug it in, fire it up, Mr President.
In the latest poll (to be published tomorrow by the Journal du Dimanche), Nicolas Sarkozy is rising. Here are the numbers (IFOP/Journal du Dimanche):
First round :
As it stands today, here's the latest IPSOS poll with a chart. As of today we have:
The point of the previous posts was to lay to rest some of America's most orientalizing narratives about France. It is important to convey the notion that no, life is not so rosy in France, especially if you don't live in the heart of Paris. You just have to take the RER (the commuter subway line) 5 stops away from the city limits, and you'll basically be transported into an alternate reality. In fact, the next time you fly to Paris, pay attention to the landscape when you ride the B line from Charles-de-Gaulle to St-Michel-Notre-Dame. You will see industrial wastelands, beat out 1930's red brick warehouses, immense housing projects from the late 1940's whose windows are dotted with satellite dishes (usually tuned in to Arabsat2B on the C-Band - for all the sat geeks out there). You will also pass by the Aulnay-sous-Bois station. This is the site of an old Peugeot factory.
This is how the dots connect : throughout what a famous local economist called the "trente glorieuses" (referring to the thirty years of economic boom that followed the end of World War II), French industrialists recruited many workers from the vast reservoir of the colonial empire. When the empire collapsed in the late 50's, French industrialists kept on with their policies of "inviting" workers from France's former dominions. Many of these workers were employed in construction (famous all around the world for its reliance on day laborers), as well as in many jobs that French people did not want to fill (for instance, Parisian trash collectors are overwhelmingly from Mali). Many were also recruited by car manufacturers, who used to run enormous assembly plants in the immediate vicinity of France's largest market, Paris. Citroën on the Quai de Javel in Paris and in Aulnay-sous-Bois (now operated by Peugeot), Renault in the Billancourt Island and Flins. The French industrialists did exactly the same as they had for their previous generation of employees: they settled the guest workers close to the production sites. The same thing happened in Lyon, with the chemical industry, or in the North with the steel industry, as well as in the many other regions of France where large numbers of workers were needed. And it's not that the French did not want to work, or did not care for factory jobs - no, it was mainly a demographic issue. In the 1950s and early 60s, as a result of two world wars in twenty-five years, France was basically shorthanded. Importing workers from North and Sub-Saharan Africa was the only practical solution. And so it came to be that ironically, the French boomers came of age at the tail-end of the 30-years long growth cycle.
These immigrants from Mali, Senegal, Niger, Congo, Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco are the unsung heroes of post-war France. (They're also the unsung heroes of the Free French Forces - without the African soldiers, de Gaulle would have achieved nothing - but that's another story.) They are the ones who rebuilt the French industrial machine, and kept it humming well into the 1970s. They are the ones who took the worst jobs, the most dangerous and exploitative jobs. They are the ones who sweep the streets and collect the garbage. They are the ones who open their stores on Sundays. They are the ones who suffered from brutal police repression during the Algerian war (let's not forget the massacre of October 1962, where for weeks dead and disfigured bodies were found floating downstream). They are the ones, along with their children, who are currently being singled out as not French enough by Nicolas Sarkozy, the big-business conservative candidate for President.
So this is the background, and why in France it is such a stigma to be from the suburbs. In the 1970s, industrial jobs started their slow and painful exodus. In 1974, the deliverance of work permits to foreign low-skill workers was discontinued. Only the families of those already in France were allowed to join them. One wonders, if this policy based on basic human decency is what Sarkozy alluded to when he spoke yesterday of an "uncontrolled immigration policy since 30, 40 years." Or was he referring to these guest workers who rebuilt France, while living in abject conditions of poverty, exploitation and alienation? Or was he referring to their contribution to post-war France, when he stated in Nice a few days ago that French colonization had not been such a bad thing after all... And by the way - oh, the humanity! - Sarkozy is himself the son of a Hungarian aristocrat who found refuge in France after the war. Nicolas Sarkozy's real name is Nicolas Sarkozy de Nagy-Bocza. Straight out of a Harlequin romance. And pretty funny, considering that Sarkozy de Nagy-Bocza wants to establish a Ministry of Immigration and National Identity. Vos Papiers! as the French copper say to the immigrant...
Deindustrialization and the neo-liberal turn are at the root of the revolt of November 2005. Back in the 70s and 80s, many of the guest workers lost their jobs. Those who were lucky enough to keep their jobs quickly found out that it would not be so for their kids. The dwindling demand for low-skill labor, combined with the rapid retooling of the French economy into a service-based economy, led to profound social unrest. Those of the French baby boomers with low skills, now in their most productive age, ended up competing for the same low-paying jobs as the first- and second- generation laborers of foreign heritage. This is still going on nowadays, and explains in part the xenophobia of the French lumpen, as well as the enduring success of that slightly ridiculous character, Jean-Marie Le Pen.
The most recent inflexion in the current electoral campaign derives directly from this rather unfortunate situation. The low-skill French population is being divided and parceled out into competing, targeted constituencies. Post-modern identity politics for the cynical politician. Sarkozy's rhetorical turn towards not-so soft racism is a direct appeal to those low-skilled, disenchanted and disenfranchised baby-boomers. Those "French" people who saw their jobs and their relative prosperity go away thanks to globalization. In a way Sarkozy embraces the notion that somehow the specifically social problems of France are rooted in racial differences. To do such a turnabout, he has to forget and recast the very policies that his political side (the party of big business) championed back in the days. And by the way, the other side - Ségolène Royal - is desperately trying to placate the same chunk of voters. She is doing it somewhat differently - it's the left-wing version of racism : citizenship is a process, Republican values must be taught, and don't you dare wear that headscarf in the classroom!
So the election will be played out on the expanding fringes of the French political spectrum. Because now the French middle-class is also feeling the pressure of globalization. Diplomas ain't worth what they used to, government jobs are being privatized and hard work and dedication won't necessarily buy you that tract house. Those closest to the low-skilled fraction of the workforce are particularly anxious for their future (this was the whole point of the demonstrations in March 2006 around the reform of the standard employment contract). The French are learning the hard way that in the fabless zones of the global knowledge economy, your prospects are pretty bleak if you're not over-educated and well-connected. Basically, without a modicum of what sociologist Pierre Bourdieu called social capital, you are destined to service jobs and logistics.
It is entirely logical, and tactically correct for the big-business candidate to exploit and turn these anxieties into racial issues. It is a way to sidestep, confuse and redirect the debate away from a rational and realistic consideration of France's predicament. This is the same candidate who claims with a straight face that he will singlehandedly lower the exchange rate of the Euro versus the Dollar. The truth is he can't and he won't, and he would not if he could. Because at heart, Sarkozy is a free-marketer. Case in point : while spewing racially charged epithets and deliberately pitting anxious lower-class disaffected French citizens against one another, he also announces that he will abolish the inheritance tax. The tough-on-crime-and-brown-people cartoonish figure hides a supply-sider neo-liberal who will methodically reduce the State to its primary regalian functions: to police and imprison (the printing money part is long gone). We are pretty well acquainted with that type of politics in the US.
Finally, it is interesting to note the current change in the theme and rhetoric of the campaign. The abrupt resurgence of racial issues is probably tied to extensive and in-depth pollling (in both camps). I guess that they are both trying to woo Le Pen's voters. Sarkozy is more aggressive at the moment because rumor has it that the Interior Ministry secret polls put him and Royal within the margin of error. The same rumor suggests that Le Pen will call on his supporters to vote for Sarkozy - but since his base is notoriously fickle, it is crucial for Sarkozy to build up his petit-blanc, redneck credentials.
Both camps assume that the runoff will be a classic left-right showdown. They have calculated that there are more votes to gain from Le Pen than from any other candidates (such as Bayrou, whose constituents will most likely come home to Sarkozy). So this is their game plan for the runoff election.
This is my personal blog. I use it as a notepad.
