Re: [cicdd] France rejects shit (+wddm for info)

[Georges Metanomski <zgmet(at)wanadoo.fr>]

=============================================
Richard Moore:
Apparently, Georges is convinced that further consolidation of the EU
is a good thing, and he seems to assume that all sensible people must
share his belief, which leads him to conclude that the Non vote must
have been a protest about something else.
=============================================
G:
I did not express any private belief or conviction,
but tried to interpret the event in the light of such
information that I may have:

-Documentation on respective arguments of both sides
 (politicians, writers, WEB sites)
-8 years of activity in local DD Forum which I initiated
 and coordinate
-Live experience of essential social problems of France.

It all converges to the French (not mine) NON being the
expression of peoples' will to see Chirac's gang go to
hell. If Chirac argued for NON, the French would have
voted OUI. It's a clear, obvious NON to Chirac.
=============================================
RM:
Personally, and I think I'm a sensible person, I can see all kinds of
solid reasons why further consolidation is not a good thing, and that
indeed consolidation has gone way too far already. Based on the kinds
of activism that characterized the Non campaign, and the kind of
issues that were raised in the streets, if not in the media, I think
it is clear that many French people do have serious reservations about
the consolidation process itself, even if many were, as Georges
assumes, expressing some other kind of protest.
=============================================
G:
Being sensible or otherwise is not relevant. The most
sensible person may occasionally be wrong and the most
lunatic idiot mat occasionally be right. Be that as it
may, I did not express any opinion and don't want to
discuss here my, nor, for that matter, your opinions.
(BTW I find them interesting and would gladly discuss
them elsewhere).
I tried to interpret the vote and came to two
conclusions:
1.EU was a pretext to tell Chirac to quit.

2.All, without exception, protagonists of NON were
for EU but none could say for which form of EU,
meaning that NON is an opening to defining this
form, postulating nevertheless that it will
fundamentally differ from Chirac-Schroeder's
lunatic asylum.

Again: that's not MY opinion, but my report.
As to our respective personal opinions, I repeat
that I would gladly cross irons with you in some
other thread.

Georges.