Not surprising, there is no free speech in France.
Especially when it comes to crooked banks or politicians. France is a strange country that likes to give lessons about democracy to the rest of the world, but when you look at things closer, France is closer to a monarchy than a democracy.
Everything is so centralised that information usually comes from an single source of truth, that journalist dont even bother questioning since they are all married with politicians (literally).
You know what, I'm willing to bet that camus2 is either French, or at least French-speaking (sorry camus2, your English is awesome, way better than my French, and I have been living in France for 10 years, but still, you make mistakes sometimes...). Which makes your comment rather ridiculous, seeing as it is one big ad-hominem based on nationality...
>France is a strange country that likes to give lessons about democracy to the rest of the world
Coming from an american (I guess), i find this hilarious.
>France is closer to a monarchy than a democracy.
I can get the comparison, current constitution was made to give important powers to the president (heavily influenced by Charles de Gaulle, which wasn't the best idea).
American democracy funding looks very much like bi-partisan plutocracy, when looked from outside, so not really a model. (And honestly, why stop with the work half-done? Be honest and bring it to one party. Or is it even harder to give democracy lesson afterward?
I was trained in school by French teachers and they spoke of France as though it was the cradle of civilization. Not just democracy came from there, but culture itself!
I want to get a decal for my pickup truck's back window with an image of the White House burning and a crying bald eagle, backdropped by an American flag, and the words "1812, Never Forget".
Camus2 seems to be French. You would not be at risk of making embarrassing mistakes like this if you made an effort to find actual arguments, instead of attempting to criticize the person you are imagining the commenter to be.
For what it's worse, this kind of critics hurt less from a fellow french (maybe because we have endured stupid governments together?).
My comment was not my brightest, far from it (none of my comment in this thread, in fact), but seeing so much french-bashing à la reddit, was too much for me I guess.
The worse is that I read this story in a french newspaper an hour before, which was less partial than the convict's blog. Gave up posting it here because paywall + language where too much hurdle for HN, and couldn't find a better article.
Seing this article afterward and the quality of the response (up to the article's value I guess), well, my reaction was not up to my own standards.
.
Still, the french institution judgment was quite stupid, and we had a good laugh. The blogger's reaction to is incoming legal battle was beyond stupid. When you receive official document an incoming legal battle, you don't ignore it outright, you either deal with it or hire someone to do it, you check what you can do and what you risk. Ignoring it until you are fined is not the best way to be heard when complaining afterward.
I'll let the previous comment I made in the thread untouched. That way I'll think twice before being rude next time.
This is sort of true. I ran a publication there for a few years and there are a lot of lines you cannot cross, lines that don't exist in the UK or the US.
One I particularly remember (though I can't quote it exactly) is that you can (could?) be hauled into court for criticising heads of state, domestic or foreign.
Probably a misunderstanding. French press criticize the President 24/7. You can't insult the president or any other official in public, or any other French citizen.
Just like in most other European countries, France lets you say what you want, as long as you don't spread lies or hatred.
That makes sense, and I'll be the first to admit my understanding of French law was not as clear as it should have been, but the line between "criticise" and "insult" is very fine.
For instance, my understanding is that, in France, one should think twice before using the words "Mugabe" and "despot" in the same sentence. This is not a problem in the UK or the US at all.
But maybe this is also part of what made France such a very civilised, cultured and enjoyable place to live.
The line between criticize and insult is so fine, I can scarcely see it. It's like the line between the ocean and the beach.
Can a French person say "The president is illiterate.", as Americans have often said about their president? Could they say "The idiotic president keeps on making up words."? Harsh criticism is naturally insulting.
Insults are not (usually) hatred. It's closer to a rule against being rude, which doesn't seem to me like something that should be enforced by the police.
Just like everywhere else: you are free to do whatever you want, provided you are willing to accept the consequences.
In this case, the consequences of publicly disagreeing with the Société Générale's accounting practices are €8000.
Or, perhaps,
"The AFM has no jurisdiction over me, so they won't collect. As a US citizen living in the US, I am not subject to the absurdities of French laws, or French witch hunts. All they get from me is a vow to never go to France."
Which is kind of a pity. France is beautiful, and the food is delicious. [I'm tempted to add, "It is truly unfortunate that the country is infested with the French", but ain't nobody got no sense of humor, either.]
I would very much be interested in the source describing this media-politics marriage dynamic that you mention.
>> Not surprising, there is no free speech in France.
I don't see this as a free speech thing. I could argue there's no free speech in X. This kind of thing happens everywhere. People with money has power.
I don't think there is a serious, in-depth analysis of the situation anywhere, but here is an article [1] that reminds these facs :
- the President's partner is a journalist
- 2 of the main ministers (Education and Work) are married to journalists
- Another mediatised one (Productive recovery) is living with another journalist
As for former cases, we had :
- the minister for foreign affairs who was married to a political journalist on public television (Bernard Kouchner and Christine Ockrent)
- a Minister for Industry and later Finances who was married to a journalist (DSK, later infamously evicted from the IMF, and Anne Sinclair)
- a Minister for Finances who was married to an evening news presenter (Jean-Louis Borloo and Beatrice Schonberg)
These are the most notorious cases that I can recall, but there are plenty of others. It's almost always a male political leader and a female journalist.
He is referring to the fact that some well-known journalists are married or live with some well-known people from politics world. For instance, Anne Sinclair, the wife of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, was presenting a very popular talk-show about politics in the 80/90ties. I know of a few current examples I don't remember of precisely.
> Especially when it comes to crooked banks or politicians. France is a strange country that likes to give lessons about democracy to the rest of the world, but when you look at things closer, France is closer to a monarchy than a democracy.
Because a monarchy is something like a dictatorship? Absolute monarchies _could_ have similarities with a dictatorship but these almost do not exist anymore. Please dive into some background information about, for example, a constitutional monarchy like we have in the Netherlands [1]. No way this resembles non-democracy.
None of the things you cited really have anything to do with freedom? You listed education, justice, wealth, and welfare. All the literacy in the world won't help you if you're not allowed to talk about the government--but maybe the CAF will make you less inclined to complain.
How is freer, a wealthy, educated, socially mobile person with healthcare who can't say certain things, or a starving person who can say anything they like?
There's a difference between "defacto freedom" and "dejure" freedom.
Do you think Patrick Henry said "Give me liberty, or give me death" - do you think John Hancock signed his name so big to attract the personal attention of King George III - do you think the American troops starving to death at Valley Forge in the winter of 1778 went up against the best military in the world - because they thought they would be better off without freedom?
What good is a phone call, if you're unable to speak?
I mean don't get me wrong, I'm super opposed to anything that limits freedom of speech for instance, but I would think twice before saying that Americans are freer than the French once taking into account socioeconomic factors.
for the record , i'm french, born in Angers, have spent time in USA and Canada. I love my country. Yet, having spent time abroad , helped me have a better understanding of my culture and its shortcomings. Sorry for the typos.
This is preposterous, do you think french people live in a cave? Last time I checked, twitter, google, facebook,... were available even in France, check it by yourself I think you'll find real french people expressing real thoughts. And nobody here trust any journalists or any politicians anymore, so I don't know on what your informations are based but it doesn't reflect what I see here.
Especially when it comes to crooked banks or politicians. France is a strange country that likes to give lessons about democracy to the rest of the world, but when you look at things closer, France is closer to a monarchy than a democracy.
Everything is so centralised that information usually comes from an single source of truth, that journalist dont even bother questioning since they are all married with politicians (literally).