« | »

France Drops Family Policy Changes After Protests

From a gobsmacked Reuters:

France’s Hollande retreats on family policy after protests

By Emmanuel Jarry | February 3, 2014

PARIS (Reuters) – France’s Socialist government dropped plans on Monday to update family law this year after huge weekend protests by conservatives against gay-friendly reforms they say harm traditional families.

Imagine having a government that actually responds to its citizens.

The government tried on Monday to reassure the protesters, who numbered over 100,000 in Paris and Lyon on Sunday, that the new law would not legalize assisted procreation for lesbian couples or surrogate motherhood for gay men who wanted children.

But when Socialist lawmakers insisted they would amend the planned bill to include those reforms, the government announced the draft law… needed more work…

Of course, here in the provincial US of A we not have not only legalized such things, we subsidize them with taxpayers dollars.

Protest leaders accused the government of "family-phobia" and said government assurances the family law would not include those reforms were lies. French law only allows assisted reproduction for married couples with infertility problems.

Imagine getting sick of being lied to by your government. (Besides, Mr. Hollande might not the best person to be deciding on issues of ‘family values.’)

The government’s retreat showed that, with President Francois Hollande’s popularity near rock bottom and municipal elections coming up next month, it is eager to avoid further conflicts with increasingly frustrated centre-right voters.

The emphasis should be on the phrase: "municipal elections coming up next month."

One of Hollande’s aides told journalists the priority was instead fighting near-record unemployment and pushing through a tax break scheme meant to get companies hiring again…

Imagine having a President, even an avowed socialist one, who understands what his administration’s priorities should be.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, February 4th, 2014. Comments are currently closed.

4 Responses to “France Drops Family Policy Changes After Protests”

  1. captstubby says:

    “Imagine having a President, even an avowed socialist one, who understands what …”
    he can’t help it
    he didn’t have the Constitutional Degree and Community organizer skills our Socialist Campaigner in Chief has.
    but confusion of the Correct theory of The Socialist State happens to the best of them,

    even that Wild and Crazy Guy Leon Trotsky cut true believers some slack when Workers required enlightenment,
    and tried to guide the proletariat back on track.

    for example, a common misunderstanding;

    Extracts from a letter to an English comrade, November 15 1931
    Marxist analysis of fascism. It was made by Leon Trotsky.

    the fascist label has been applied to such figures and movements.

    The Communist movement was still on its ultra-left binge (the so-called Third Period) when the Nazi movement began to snowball. To
    the Stalinists, every capitalist party was automatically “fascist”.

    Indiscriminate use of the term really reflects vagueness about its meaning. Asked to define fascism, the liberal replies in such terms as
    dictatorship, mass neurosis, anti-Semitism, the power of unscrupulous propaganda, the hypnotic effect of a mad-genius orator on the
    masses, etc. Impressionism and confusion on the part of liberals is not surprising. But Marxism’s superiority consists of its ability to
    analyze and differentiate among social and political phenomena. That so many of those calling themselves Marxists cannot define
    fascism any more adequately than the liberals is not wholly their fault. Whether they are aware of it or not, much of their intellectual
    heritage comes from the social-democratic (reformist socialist) and Stalinist movements.

    socialist leader Jean Jaures’ a right-wing social patriot. In the 1930s, he and Marcel Deat led revisionist “neo-socialist” tendency. Voted down at the July 1933
    convention, this tendency split from the Socialist Party. After the fascist riots of February 6, 1934, most of the “neos” joined the
    Radical Party, the main party of French capitalism.]
    A workers’ socialist state can be created only by a victorious revolution.
    Every revolution is prepared by the march of economic and political development, but it is always decided by open armed conflicts
    between hostile classes. A revolutionary victory can become possible only as a result of long political agitation, a lengthy period of
    education and organization of the masses.
    But the armed conflict itself must likewise be prepared long in advance.
    The advanced workers must know that they will have to fight and win a struggle to the death. They must reach out for arms, as a
    guarantee of their emancipation.

    From “Some Questions on American Problems”, Fourth International, October 1940
    The backwardness of the United State working class is only a relative term.
    In very many important respects, it is the most progressive working class of the world, technically and in its standard of living….
    The American workers are very combative — as we have seen during the strikes. They have had the most rebellious strikes in the
    world. What the American worker misses is a spirit of generalization, or analysis, of his class position in society as a whole. This lack
    of social thinking has its origin in the country’s whole history….

    The proletariat

    from Latin proletarius) is a term used to describe the class of wage-earners (especially industrial workers) in a capitalist society whose only possession of significant material value is their labour-power (their ability to work); a member of such a class is a proletarian.
    Usage in Roman law
    As defined in the Constitution of the Roman Republic, the proletarii was a social class of Roman citizens owning little or no property.
    The origin of the name is presumably linked with the census, which Roman authorities conducted every five years to produce a register of citizens and their property from which their military duties and voting privileges could be determined. For citizens with property valued 11,000 asses or less, which was below the lowest census for military service, their children—proles (from Latin proli, “offspring”)—were listed instead of their property; hence, the name proletarius, “the one who produces offspring”. The only contribution of a proletarius to the Roman society was seen in his ability to raise children, the future Roman citizens who can colonize new territories conquered by the Roman Republic and later by the Roman Empire. The citizens who had no property of significance were called capite censi because they were “persons registered not as to their property…but simply as to their existence as living individuals, primarily as heads (caput) of a family.”
    Karl Marx, who studied Roman law at the University of Berlin, used the term proletariat in his socio-political theory of Marxism to describe a working class unadulterated by private property and capable of a revolutionary action to topple capitalism in order to create classless society.

    Marx makes a clear distinction between proletariat as salaried workers, which he sees a progressive class, and Lumpenproletariat, “rag-proletariat”, the poorest and outcasts of the society, such as beggars, tricksters, entertainers, buskers, criminals and prostitutes, which he considers a retrograde class.Socialist parties have often struggled over the question of whether they should seek to organize and represent all the lower classes, or just the wage-earning proletariat.
    The wages received by workers do not reflect the full value of their work, because some of that value is taken by the employer in the form of profit. Therefore, “making a profit” essentially means taking away from the workers some of the value that results from their labor. This is what is known as capitalist exploitation.

    and online sources.

  2. canary says:

    And Obama can never mention growing up without his birth father again.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »