Sarkozy will fix everything

How long can super-Sarko keep it up, the French are wondering?

Fresh back from saving Europe  -- at least in the eyes of his admiring subjects -- President Sarkozy laid down a new industrial doctrine for France and the Union on Saturday at the Paris air show. 

Today he has lectured Condoleezza Rice, the Secretary of State, on US responsibility for climate change; he has opened an international conference on Darfour and tonight Arnold Schwarzenegger is dropping into the Elysée Palace to consult him on the environment.  In between, Sarko has been telling recalcitrant student leaders about his plans for repairing France's decrepit univerities.

By tradition, French leaders are not supposed to be so dynamic.

With the exception of Valéry Giscard d'Estaing in the 1970s, modern presidents have retreated into the Elysée Palace after election, leaving the visible side of government to their Prime Ministers.  Jacques Chirac used to address his subjects only on Bastille Day and the New Year.

The leftwing opposition and some of Sarkozy's own camp are grumbling about the Hyper-President, the term for his mania for managing everything and knocking together heads until he gets what he wants. The most visible example was his takeover of the TF1 main evening television news last Wednesday night. The whole show, including all the news unrelated to the presidency, was broadcast from his gilded palace office. The president gave a 50-minute explanatory talk to the nation,  fidgeting all the time and  with his ankle across his knee. 

The two news stars -- Patrick Poivre d'Arvor and Claire Chazal -- acted like meek courtiers in the presence of Sa Majesté Sarko I, as the left media have taken to calling him.

Marianne, a leftwing news weekly, worried hypocritically today about what all this meant for poor Francois Fillon, the Prime Minister. "How can Fillon stand up to it?," wondered Marianne. "On one side there is the monarch, all grace and ouverture; on the other there is his grand chamberlain, widely criticised and reduced to implementing the president's programme." (ouverture -- opening -- is the word for Sarkozy's recruitment of centrists and leftists to his rightwing government).

To be fair, Sarkozy's act so far been impressive. Over 60 percent of the French approve although only 53 percent voted for him, according to weekend polls. France was excessively dazzled by the way that he helped broker the Union's simplified constitution at his first EU summit in Brussels last Friday night. But Sarko made his mark, raising expectations of a new vigorous France and also a few worries about what lies on store.

For all Sarko's pragmatic modern style, Britain and others among France's partners have reason to reflect on the merits of a revived France so energetically asserting ideas that differ from their own.

In Brussels on Saturday, Sarko successfully excised from the new treaty the reference to "free and undistorted competition" being a principal aim of the EU.  At Le Bourget a few hours later, he said that this meant the "end of competition as an ideology and a dogma" in Europe. That is music to French ears but not to Gordon Brown, Britain's new Prime Minister. Sarkozy spelt out his protectionist doctrine in his Le Bourget speech. Europe must have a common industrial strategy, he said. It must cease being exploited by aggressive exporting nations. "You want us to open our markets ? We will open them the minute you open yours," he said."

The Sarko show is far from slowing down. To the dismay of his ministers and parliamentarians, he is demanding that everyone stays at their posts until the end of July -- well into France's traditional summer break.

Comments

[Daniel Strohl]

"...knocking together heads until he gets what he wants".

Nice formulation ! Unfortunately, there are so many heads to knock together that it will take much time to achieve the goals, i.e. having our country functioning properly and being able to compete with other countries. Meanwhile, many people and politicians will continue to whine all the time about "globalisation et mondialisation".

[Terry]

Lectures on the global warming hoax? Advocating protectionism? Groan. Bring back Chirac.

[Dominique]

"Marianne, a leftwing news weekly,"

Euh...Charles, this is not a leftwing, but a centrism news weekly. JF Kahn did a strong campaign in favor of Bayrou.

[Groucheaux]

Re Daniel Strohl - "being able to compete with other countries" is the giveaway phrase in your post, along with your jibe about people whining about globalisation. Sounds like you bought the neo-liberal lie about how wonderful unregulated markets are. Fortunately, Sarkozy isn't that stupid. He'll continue to bewilder the Anglophile and Anglophone yuppies who thought he'd be a Thatcherite, simply by doing what Presidents ought to do, defending the interests of la France.

[colin grayson`]

isn't it pathetic ; sarko telling the french he knocked heads together at the summit , tony blair telling the british that he got things arranged as he wanted for britain , angela merkel the germans and no doubt all the others when they got home

no wonder we have no faith in politicians ; first thing they learn at their mothers knee is evidently the journalist's motto ...never let the truth get in the way of a good story
sorry charles , gbg

as regards for opening of markets , how about making it possible for companies from other EU countries to operate in france ...every effort is made to block them , and if there is a cross border merger , it will only get approval if the company is based in france!!! just look at the record ....having said that I haven't seen the details of the euronext deal , though I can't imagine the nyse hq moving to france !

[Edward Johns]

Will the closure of the US owned Wright Medical in Toulon, with around 130 job losses be fixed by Sarko I wonder ? They are not exactly in the Airbus league.

[Andy]

"aggrewssive exporting nations" - typo

Sarko's intentions were clearly telegraphed in numerous interviews before the election. If our all wise Euro national leaders were so happy to do away, with so little fuss, with "free and undistorted competition" as being a principal aim of the EU, then I think we can see at first (sleight of) hand why we should ban lawyers (even recycled ones) from anywhere near serious issues. No wonder Gordon Broon felt compelled (but sadly failed) to stiffen the wobbly back of another recycled (soon to be replaced) sharpster. It was all clearly played out before their eyes - and he still got away with it.

[Actu75]

"a revived France so energetically asserting ideas that differ from their own."
Vive la différence !
Free trade: a principle or a dogma?
a mean or an end?

[Ade]

GROUCHEAUX: Totally agree with you about these neo-liberal, ultra-capitalist lies spread by those sick Brits. But there's another European country I've been learning about that's even worse than them, can u believe it?.

This country by many methods (mainly the everlasting guilt of a certain other nation's past) sucks more money than virtually anyone else out of it's European neighbours as possible, then prevents companies from these other countries doing business with them on equal terms. When they get fined by the EU for such behaviour, they say 'sod off' and never pay it.

Then they pump up, for example, their national power company with public money and take advantage of Europe's openess to aggressively take over other European utlities using impossibly (neo-liberal?) unfair competition. They then fire thousands of the employees of these companies (London Elec for example) so they can make as much 'capital' as possible.

And the icing on the cake, none of this behaviour is ever reported in their TV press so that many of their own citizens live in complete ignorance of this. Incredible! You've got to take your hat off to them.

Has got to be the most ultra-capitalist country in Europe frankly. Which one is it? Tell u what, take a really wild guess.

And what on earth is a neo-liberal anyway?

And please everybody, stop watching TF1 and France2 - you too Charles. Let me be a sad example to you. Ten years ago I moved to France with a Doctorate in Quantum Physics. I started watching TF1 and France 2. And i am now, officially, a vegetable. And not just any vegetable. I have become, tragically, an........aubergine. And that, dear friends, is the stupidest of all the veggie kingdom.

[Stephen Bull]

In spite of your over-excited comments, Sarkozy is just doing what he said he would do. Everything - the economic protectionism, the can-do approach to the treaty, the employment draft laws, etc.. are spewing out at a rate which exceeds anything we have seen since he closed down Sangatte. Ignore this man at your peril

[azloon]

sarko and condo -- now there's a pair to draw to.

[Ros]

Ade, - I understand - I too have become a vegetable looking at TF1 & Fr2 & for much longer than ten years too. There's plenty of choice and even if one doesn't have Cable, Satellite etc, there's always France 3 at 19h20 which has quite a different attitude.

[Ros]

"Over 60 percent of the French approve although only 53 percent voted for him" - you're of course right, Charles, but I think we've had enough of percentages and polls for the moment !

[Maggie]

Yes but is all this activity providing jobs ?
Is protectionism going to prevent none French companies coming in , which would provide jobs ?
He is so busy promoting France me thinks he is not getting his priorities in order.

[Pierre]

"Free trade: a principle or a dogma?"

A freedom. Like, you know, freedom of speech. Freedom of buying something in Africa even if some lazy French farmers whine.

Before you open your mouth about a technical subject like economics, what about learning it ?

[christopher muir]

Maggie - Your comments are realistic. The very recent report by the Bank of International Settlements points to the shark infested waters that surround debt-ridden countries today. It may be too late - even for magician Sarko- to prevent some very unpleasant economic events taking charge of political agendas.

[Helen]

Maggie - he's only been in power for a little over a month. Jobs don't grow overnight, give it a chance.

[peter didier]

the french dont know what has hit them...and rightfully so..chirac and mitterand were absolutely useless having brought the french right down to the bottom of the pile...let sarko whip them into shape and bring the country back up to par...one french person i know is reading a book on hitler thinking he and sarko have similar characteristics...indicative of how ridiculous their thinking can be...sweeping, decisive change!!!bring it on!!!

[Dominique]

Peter,

amazing how people always think that those who think differently always think wrong!

Pierre,

Did anyone ever forbid you from buying anything in Africa?

More, you should definitly open dictionaries and philosophy books. You would find out that the words freedom and liberty are quite difficult to define. People with simple ideas usually get it wrong! sorry

[Robert Marchenoir]

I love the shoulder hug Sarkozy gives Condi Rice.

He does it with everyboy, including the much taller Chirac on the day he left the Elysée. I'm not sure Condi is used to this sort of touching. In America, this would land you in jail for sexual harrassment, I guess.

[terry]

Dominique:

What's so hard about understanding what freedom and liberty is?

When I took philosophy in college, the professor made us try to define a chair. Of course, he poked holes in all of our definitions. It was a fun intellectual exercise about the limits of language, I guess, but that was it.

[Valerie]

Marianne not LEFT-WING? LOL That's good one! LOL LOL I'm dyin' here.

JFKahn is no far to the left, you have to lean over just to hear what he's saying. Marianne is uber-Left.

[David]

I had to take a double take at Marrianne being described as not left wing, I laughed out loud.

Sarkozy did destroy the only good thing in the undemocratic mess known as the EU, however as a French tax and social security fund payer I can can see that he is doing it for France.

If only Mr Sarkozy could bring some of his energy to bear in bringing democracy back to the people of Europe, but sadly that does not seem to be one of his goals.

What makes Sarkozy different, simple, he says what he thinks and means what he says and does so with energy, in this respect I actually cherish him, he will cetainly shake up a lot of complacency.

[Daniel Strohl]

GROUCHEAUX,

« Being able to compete with other countries »
Following your post, I had a second look at what I have written : it was too fast and too careless as it appears ...

I did not mean economic competition in the Anglo-Saxon way. I am not at all a fanatic of unregulated markets - however a dosis of « saine émulation » may help as for example the case of France Télécom shows – when they had the monopole, the prices were unreasonably high, even when the quality was still miserable; 30 or 35 years ago, you had often to wait 10 minutes or more to get « la tonalité ». At that time, in comparable European countries, this was not the case – may be some « ancients » on this blog may confirm what I say.

What I had in mind is that several things should and could be improved to heave us at a level comparable with the level of our various neighbours (hence my phrase « being able to compete with other countries »). Sarkozy's program addresses these issues (for example « le service minimum » in transportation), and as it seems, he means business. The latter is new – up to now, we were mainly used to « belles phrases », ENA style.

Our retard is particularly obvious in our school and university system if one measures it with objective parameters (PISA studies ranking versus per capita expenses in « l'enseignement secondaire », number of recent Nobel prize laureates at University - and with somewhat more « subjective » rankings i.e. « The Times Higher Education Supplement 2006 » and the Jiao Tong University in Shangai).

At this point, let me draw, if necessary, your attention to the excellent article about our Education Nationale written today by Charles on the front page of our august « The Times ». Sincere compliments !

PS : Please allow me a commentary about the words « unregulated markets » and « protectionism », which one may read rather frequently in this blog's commentaries.

The Pentagon intents to order a huge number of big aircrafts for the Air Force (fuel supply in the air); Boeing and Airbus are bidding – Boeing had already got the order, but it was cancelled due to some « problems ». If Airbus wins the contract, I will be convinced at least partially by the free market heralds. If Boeing wins, I am sure that Terry, as a professional lawyer with a sound back-ground in aviation, will find excellent arguments to justify the choice of Boeing by the Pentagon (Terry, nothing personal, of course !).

[Dominique]

Terry

If you think that freedom and liberty are easy to define, try answering these few simple questions :

- Are you free? please explain.
- Is your neighbor free? please explain.
- Am i free? please explain.

For all : Marianne is not leftwing. It was a staunch Bayrou supporter. Of course, you'll probably answer that Bayrou is leftwing... The reason why you believe so is probably because you are rightwing people believing you are at the center...

rethoric rethoric

[Terry]

Daniel:

To be clear, I only have a VFR rating for single engine. This means that I can only fly in good weather to save you a long explanation. CB, I am sure, is instrument rated on at least a single engine, maybe even a twin. This means he has passed training qualifying him to fly in bad/overcast weather. He can fly a plane without looking out the window. That's someone with a "sound" background in flying. In other words, I can fly and I am a good pilot. But I'm hardly an expert.

As to the Boeing/Airbus thing, I am for free trade. If they give it to Boeing, I hope it will be because Boeing makes a cheaper, better and/or more effecient product (I have no particular knowledge about the aircraft in question). Look, I am a taxpayer. I don't want to have to pay millions and billions for something when someone else can do it better and cheaper. I'll be the first to tell you that our government is way too protectionist, especially with our farmers. In the end, it is the taxpayer who foots the bill through more expensive goods/services. The whole essence of the market system is competition. Adam Smith, Hayek, Friedman all warned of the dangers of the tendencies toward protectionism and monolopies (business and UNIONS).

Sauce for the goose.

BTW: No offense taken by the way.

[Terry]

Dominique said:

If you think that freedom and liberty are easy to define, try answering these few simple questions :

- Are you free? please explain.
- Is your neighbor free? please explain.
- Am i free? please explain.

Ding! Class is in, Dominique. Get out your notebook. Professor Thierry will spoonfeed it to you.

1. Yes, I am free. I live in a constitutional democracy that protects the rights of the individual, including but not limited to speech, property and religion, from "society" and government.

2. Yes, my neighbor is free. Since he lives in the U.S., see number 1.

3. Yes, you are free too. You also live in a constitutional democracy. You get to choose where you live. You can enter any field of work you like (although you settled for teacher). You can vote for whoever you like, even that totalitarian socialist you voted for. And you can expouse your silly socialist notions without fear of consequence, save ridicule.

There endeth the lesson.

[Dominique]

Terry,

please find below my comments to your answer. I really though you'd be a bit more profound...

"1. Yes, I am free. I live in a constitutional democracy that protects the rights of the individual, including but not limited to speech, property and religion, from "society" and government."

So, if some one in the streets points you with a gun and ask for your belongings, you are still free? I personnaly believe that people are "more" free in countries where guns are not for sale. That is just an example of the limitation to freedom you can find in a country, eventhough it is a freedom beacon. Are those in jail free as long as the jail is in a "free" country?

"2. Yes, my neighbor is free. Since he lives in the U.S., see number 1."
same answer! unless he carries the gun!!

"3. Yes, you are free too. You also live in a constitutional democracy. You get to choose where you live. You can enter any field of work you like (although you settled for teacher). You can vote for whoever you like, even that totalitarian socialist you voted for. And you can expouse your silly socialist notions without fear of consequence, save ridicule"
wrong i can not leave where i want because i need a visa to go in, let's say, Australia! Even in France, i am not free to live where i want because it depends on my incomes !!

How can you be so naïve?

[David]

- Are you free? please explain.
- Is your neighbor free? please explain.
- Am i free? please explain.

In Europe I am no longer free, the people who make policy and law are no longer elected directly by the population (and that has ben the situation for some time), I am in the process of losing my freedom.

The European Council which will become the government of the EU once this treaty lite is passed hve already deemed that so called Islamophobia is a crime punishable by extreme sanctions, I am not free, I can no longer express concern at a tolitarian religion strangling us. I am not free.

As a European I wish I was unsophisticated enough to have the first and second amendment, am I free, nope.

Talking about guns, are you free when the terrorists and criminals have guns an you do not and the police do not protect us, are we free, in the UK for example I note that gun crime is up and guns are illegal, who is free, the Amerian with the licence to carry a gun or the Brit who is not allowed or able to protect himself.

Freedom is freedom of expression without fear, where the only limit to such expression is ridicule, freedom is being able to vote for those that make policy and pass laws, freedom is being able to defend yourself and your family, am I free in Europe, no and the EU should be ashamed of itself instead of patting itself onthe back by conning the European people once again.

[Terry]

Dominique:

Once again, you confuse freedom with entitlement. Freedom doesn't mean you are handed what you want. If you want a nice house, save money or find a job that earns more pay. You are free to leave that nice, soft job as a teacher to something a little more demanding that pays better. But you have chosen that lifestyle. If want to move to Australia (I am sure that we all support you in this endeavor), get a visa and emigrate there. You are free to do so.

As to being robbed with a gun, I guess that no one can ever be free under your definition since there will always be a possibility of be robbed. Gun laws or not. I see you put a lot of thought into that one.

[Terry]

David:

I hate to say I agree with you. It's a little scary watching Europe falling into that abyss known as the European Union. I particularly like how Mr. Barasso makes no bother to hide the fact that he is trying to sidestep treaty ratification and backdoor Europeans. Tricking, cajoling and bullying is not a good beginning for a "democratic" institution.

Oh, and you have to love the Constitution. What is it? 400 pages? Crammed with economic nonsense. Yet, there are all your European leaders, herding its citizenry into political cattle cars. It seems that all the European countries are going into the union to see what special economic benefits they can extort from each other. I am not so sure that is the premise that should be "uniting" in Europe. Make no mistake though. Those socialists in Brussels are planning to rule Europe as they, not Britains or French, see fit. As a British history in college, I learned that the key to understanding several hundred years of British foreign policy was protecting against a hegemonic power on the continent. I cannot believe that England will gleely hand over its sovereignty to a cabal in Brussels.

I thought the French "non" might have daggered the dragon for a long time. Apparently not. There seems to be no stopping the juggernaut, David.

[David]

Terry, there is no stopping the EU, we now have the final nail in our democratic coffin. Policy and laws will now be set by a bunch of unelected people in the Commission, while the European Council is made up of selected MP's from various states including non-EU states like Turkey, but it hardly makes it an elected chamber and fit for law making.

We are in trouble, serious trouble and most people do not realise it and if they do shrug their shoulders, what can we do to stop this.

But they are building on sand anyway, us Europeans have no fight left in us, what is there to fight for, the EU, I would not send my son to fight for that, I would hide him instead. Now the Muslims will take Europe demographically and by the time they get it it won't be worth much... Collective suicide indeed!

[Dominique]

Terry,

"Freedom doesn't mean you are handed what you want". Well, i am afraid it does. This is the very definition of the word (at least in french!). And this is exactly the point : freedom does not exist. No one on earth is free. Everything is "relatif" as we say.

And i do not confuse freedom with entitlement. I think you are. The law forbids me from being free. I don't comlain, i just say what is.

[terry]

Dominique:

No one is free? Freedom means you are given what you want? Please explain.

[Dominique]

Terry,

Try to jump out of the window and fly. You'll anderstand that you are not free.

[terry]

Some quotes on freedom & liberty from several French philosophers.

"Free people, remember this maxim: We may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost."
- Jean Jacques Rousseau

Liberty is not and cannot be anything but the power of doing what we will.- Voltaire

Try to jump out of the window and fly. You'll anderstand[sic] that you are not free. - Dominique

Honestly, do you know how stupid what you said was?

Terry

[Valentin]

"Honestly, do you know how stupid what you said was?"

So annoyingly typical response.
Dominique's making the (very simple) point that freedom is not limitless, it must be reasonable and is limited by the freedom and the rights of others.

The "power of doing what we will" was meant for times of absolutist monarchy. Now it's just a silly maxim to justify self-righteousness, selfishness, and not in the least, bad manners.

[Dominique]

Terry,

I absolutly agree with Voltaire (if your quote is correct!)

"Liberty is not and cannot be anything but the power of doing what we will.- Voltaire"

So, if you don't have the power of doing what you "will" (for example flying) then you're not free!

That is the perfect explanation of what i said! thanks for bringing Voltaire with us! But be aware he was not quite a fan of what you would call "absolute freedom" and believed in an "organized" society.

"ce qui est utile à la société est utile à chacun"

in english : what is usefull to the society is usefull to the indicidual".

Freedom will always be associated to a predefined frame, and therefore limited. The issue then is twofold :

- who defines the frame?
- how does the individual fit into this frame?

Good luck!

[terry]

I gave you my definition dominique. Several posts ago. I think it adequately suffices. Read it again if you have to.

Why dont you define it for us?

[Dominique]

Terry,

Liberté : État de celui, de ce qui n'est pas soumis à une ou des contrainte(s) externe(s).

This is the very first meaning. But as i can't accept simple answers to complex problems, please find below a more complex, and therefore accurate, answer :

http://atilf.atilf.fr/dendien/scripts/tlfiv5/visusel.exe?11;s=2874427320;r=1;nat=;sol=0;

[David]

I think the only limit to freedom of expression should be the fear of being ridiculed for what you said or do.

You are free to jump out of a window if you want, and you will fly for a very brief period, I would of course call you a complete looney for jumping out of the window to prove that you are not free. Free of what, natural laws like gravity, I have seen some rather senseless arguments in my time, but your comment is very amusing.

[Dominique]

David,

I won't jump out of a window to prove anything, because, at least, i already know that i am not free! We obviously can't say the same about you & Terry...

amazing how the simple recall of a word definition can make people lose their intelectual ability. Is the reality so scandalous that you can't stand it?

Terry&David : weather you accept it or not, i am sorry to inform you : you are not free.

Your mum & dad should have told you already! Be carrefull, the castration anxiety comes next!!

[Terry]

Dominique:

You get yourself in deeper every time.

You said:

Freedom will always be associated to a predefined frame, and therefore limited. The issue then is twofold :

The internal contradictions in your thought process (if we can call it that) are glaring. How can there be "freedom" if no one is free? How can be limits to freedom, if no one can be free? And no one is free, Dominique? I have the same freedom as Cubans? Chinese?

Here's how I said I was free.

1. Yes, I am free. I live in a constitutional democracy that protects the rights of the individual, including but not limited to speech, property and religion, from "society" and government.

I really do not see how jumping out of a window has anything to do my right to religion or freedom of speech. There are limits. The U.S. Supreme Court noted I can't yell "Fire" in a crowded theater (unless it actually is on fire). But that does not mean I am not free. It just means that I cannot use my freedom to harm others.

As for intellectual ability, well, I guess you are the product of the French university system. Honestly, Dominique, debate with you is not even fair. It's like the masters playing rugby against the boys in Monty Python's Meaning of Life. As least Schnittger (whatever) gives me rational arguments.

What age group do you teach, Dominique? I think you have been lording it over the little tykes too long.

[Pierre n°1]

Well, you've all gone to prove that the question posed by my namesake wasn't quite so trivial.