France's far right National Front says it could copy Trump's travel ban
25 replies, posted
[QUOTE] France’s far right National Front party says if Marine Le Pen is elected president in May it would consider imposing a Donald Trump-like travel ban on citizens of certain Muslim countries.
National Front mayor Steeve Briois, who is a leading member of Le Pen’s campaign team was asked whether his party would consider imposing the same ban that has barred citizens of seven Muslim countries from travelling to the US.
“Why not,” he said. “We not living in the word of Care Bears anymore. We are in a horrible world,” he told AFP.
“So from time to time we must take authoritarian measures, even if they shock,” said the mayor of the northern town of Henin-Beaumont.
“It is true that the United States is also a target for jihadists, so if Trump wants to protect it by forbidding the arrival of these people from these countries, he is free to do that.
“Obviously it is unfortunate for those who have nothing to do with that,” he added.
Marine Le Pen has so far not commented on whether she would consider a similar ban, but she did defend Trump at the weekend, saying the only reason people were so angry was because he was sticking to his promises.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.thelocal.fr/20170130/frances-far-right-national-front-donald-trump-travel-ban[/url]
Why don't we ban them from traveling?
They are too dangerous for everyone.
I mean the nationalists
One hopes that the French people, after seeing the disaster that Trump's ban is, will realise that the National Front are also unfit to govern France.
It's much easier for the US to ban movement than it would be for France. It's also a terrible idea.
[QUOTE=MarcusSmith;51755561]Why don't we ban them from traveling?
They are too dangerous for everyone.
I mean the nationalists[/QUOTE]
No need, because nationalists don't like leaving their home country anyway.
[B]Edit:[/B] Aboard is full of scary foreigners.
[QUOTE=Vlevs;51755603]No need, because nationalists don't like leaving their home country anyway.[/QUOTE]
Then let's ban them from their own country.
if this comes to pass it'll be interesting to see what effect it'll have on terrorism if any
It makes me happy that with this and America, I know that if our rightwing cumstain gets elected, I won't have to worry about him pulling ridiculous bullshit out of the blue, since our system has no room for that.
It'll be absolutely hilarious if he gets elected prime minister because then his followers find out that he won't be able to do jack shit.
We thought the catastrophe of Brexit would be a warning against electing Trump.
Let's hope the election of Trump serves as a better warning for the election of Le Pen.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;51755724]It makes me happy that with this and America, I know that if our rightwing cumstain gets elected, I won't have to worry about him pulling ridiculous bullshit out of the blue, since our system has no room for that.
It'll be absolutely hilarious if he gets elected prime minister because then his followers find out that he won't be able to do jack shit.[/QUOTE]
wilders' party is leading in 8 of the last 10 polls :)
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51755789]We thought the catastrophe of Brexit would be a warning against electing Trump.
Let's hope the election of Trump serves as a better warning for the election of Le Pen.[/QUOTE]
So far, Tired of Experts and blind right wing nationalism seems to be the winning mantra no matter where we look. I hope just as much Le Pen doesn't win, but there's no discounting [i]anything[/i] until the elections are over.
A lot of experts and polls say Le Pen has much less of a chance than Trump due to how the French system works. I wouldn't discount polls and experts entirely on this. Polls shifted heavily towards Trump in the last week of the election (I was religiously following 538 the entire cycle), and Brexit was within a margin of error. Le Pen isn't anywhere near within the scope that Trump and Brexit were.
[QUOTE=catchall;51755808]wilders' party is leading in 8 of the last 10 polls :)[/QUOTE]
He'll still need to get 4 cabinets all on the same page to come even close to making good on his promises.
Oh well, see you later.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51755789]We thought the catastrophe of Brexit would be a warning against electing Trump.
Let's hope the election of Trump serves as a better warning for the election of Le Pen.[/QUOTE]
I don't think people see both of theses a catastrophes yet. If something's wrong it's still the liberal/democrats fault, no matter where you look. As long as it doesn't hurt them directly and immediatly, they won't care that much. Which is a shame. If Le Pen gets elected it's gonna be hell.
[QUOTE=Aldawolf;51755997]A lot of experts and polls say Le Pen has much less of a chance than Trump due to how the French system works. I wouldn't discount polls and experts entirely on this. Polls shifted heavily towards Trump in the last week of the election (I was religiously following 538 the entire cycle), and Brexit was within a margin of error. Le Pen isn't anywhere near within the scope that Trump and Brexit were.[/QUOTE]
She might win the first round but in the second round with only two candidates people will tactically vote for the other candidate to stop them (The FN) getting in just as they have done at every election in France in the past few years.
[quote]“Why not,” he said. “We not living in the word of Care Bears anymore. We are in a horrible world,” he told AFP.[/quote]
What a bizarre thing to say, implying we at some point used to live in "the word of Care Bears" or that we should do horrible things because it's a horrible world now apparently.
As if we shouldn't work towards making the world a nicer place
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;51755600]It's much easier for the US to ban movement than it would be for France. It's also a terrible idea.[/QUOTE]
would it be more difficult for France to ban movement from the countries that the US has?
[editline]31st January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Talishmar;51756109]What a bizarre thing to say, implying we at some point used to live in "the word of Care Bears" or that we should do horrible things because it's a horrible world now apparently.
As if we shouldn't work towards making the world a nicer place[/QUOTE]
has multiculturalism made the world a [I]nicer[/I] place?
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51756200]
has multiculturalism made the world a [I]nicer[/I] place?[/QUOTE]
in a roundabout way, yes. the world hasn't had a global conflict since WW2, and, up until a few years ago, things were relatively stable.
honestly the definition of "nicer" depends on which period of history you're drawing from. from the last 50~ or so i'd say yes, but mainly because the spectre of war isn't looming over us. social mobility is still sluggish, the elite are still firmly the elite
beyond that i.e. Pre-WW2 absolutely. peace and tolerance has allowed people to move beyond their social rank, to have new opportunities in the world and overall have a better quality of life than they had before.
i grant that most of these benefits are "not war" but i consider that a pretty big benefit
[QUOTE=catchall;51755808]wilders' party is leading in 8 of the last 10 polls :)[/QUOTE]
So? That doesn't mean he'll be able to do all the stupid shit he wants to do if he can somehow get into a coalition, which is unlikely because basically none of the mainstream parties want to work with him
[QUOTE=EXPLOOOSIONS!;51756647]in a roundabout way, yes. the world hasn't had a global conflict since WW2, and, up until a few years ago, things were relatively stable.
honestly the definition of "nicer" depends on which period of history you're drawing from. from the last 50~ or so i'd say yes, but mainly because the spectre of war isn't looming over us. social mobility is still sluggish, the elite are still firmly the elite
beyond that i.e. Pre-WW2 absolutely. peace and tolerance has allowed people to move beyond their social rank, to have new opportunities in the world and overall have a better quality of life than they had before.
i grant that most of these benefits are "not war" but i consider that a pretty big benefit[/QUOTE]
can we say that there haven't been any major global conflicts because of multiculturalism though?
I suppose nicer is subjective but as the world becomes more multicultural I would argue that it is actually losing its charm. The more multicultural the world becomes the more the cultures merge and eventually everything will be similar. Travelling to culturally different countries will certainly lose some of it's charm as the world seems to be moving more towards western civilisation.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51756954]can we say that there haven't been any major global conflicts because of multiculturalism though?
I suppose nicer is subjective but as the world becomes more multicultural I would argue that it is actually losing its charm. The more multicultural the world becomes the more the cultures merge and eventually everything will be similar. Travelling to culturally different countries will certainly lose some of it's charm as the world seems to be moving more towards western civilisation.[/QUOTE]
A small price to pay if it means we don't have a major war every 15 years.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51756954]can we say that there haven't been any major global conflicts because of multiculturalism though?
I suppose nicer is subjective but as the world becomes more multicultural I would argue that it is actually losing its charm. The more multicultural the world becomes the more the cultures merge and eventually everything will be similar. Travelling to culturally different countries will certainly lose some of it's charm as the world seems to be moving more towards western civilisation.[/QUOTE]
in that regard, yes, multiculturalism is slowly consuming smaller cultures, and amalgamating others into one giant "Western" culture
make no mistake, i don't want a giant, homogeneous "culture" blob. i like being British, and our dumb cultural ideas (such as queuing, British weather and the correct pronunciation of scone) and I would rather these remain for the future, however I don't believe that the way to do this is by preventing other cultures from existing inside our country. I think that when cultures interact with each other, we can see some interesting and worthwhile results, but on the other hand, ideals stemming from the far end of capitalism (i.e. "you must have the latest X or you are literally nobody") should be stopped, somehow.
[QUOTE=EXPLOOOSIONS!;51757008]in that regard, yes, multiculturalism is slowly consuming smaller cultures, and amalgamating others into one giant "Western" culture
make no mistake, i don't want a giant, homogeneous "culture" blob. i like being British, and our dumb cultural ideas (such as queuing, British weather and the correct pronunciation of scone) and I would rather these remain for the future, however I don't believe that the way to do this is by preventing other cultures from existing inside our country. I think that when cultures interact with each other, we can see some interesting and worthwhile results, but on the other hand, ideals stemming from the far end of capitalism (i.e. "you must have the latest X or you are literally nobody") should be stopped, somehow.[/QUOTE]
I have been travelling for years and it's already becoming obvious that western influence is changing parts of the world that would be better off without it.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;51757007]A small price to pay if it means we don't have a major war every 15 years.[/QUOTE]
but it doesn't mean that.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51757051]I have been travelling for years and it's already becoming obvious that western influence is changing parts of the world that would be better off without it.[/QUOTE]
And I don't see how banning travel from those countries to western countries is going to change that. Western companies will continue to operate there to sell their goods and gradually impose western ways of life to the locals.
Multiculturalism is completely irrelevant to the global hegemony of western culture. You should look at the grasp of capitalism over culture instead.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51756200]would it be more difficult for France to ban movement from the countries that the US has?[/quote]
Because to get from Syria (or 1 of the other banned countries) to the US would, realistically, require you to fly. Flying generally means to get checked for identification.
To get from Syria to France you can walk it and, if you avoid places with passport checks, you can get there without needing documentation.
It's much easier to control people coming into the US than it is for France.
And ( since closing borders and restricting movement is what you are alluding to ) closing borders and checking everyone wouldn't work. If a terrorist is going to commit a crime they can find a part of the border which isn't secure and sneak through into France. Why would they, a person planning to commit awful crimes, be uneasy about sneaking through a field at night?
[quote]
has multiculturalism made the world a [I]nicer[/I] place?[/QUOTE]
Define nicer. If it means I get a wider selection of things to enjoy, wider appreciation, understanding and tolerance for other cultures then yes. It has its downsides but it sure beats the alternative.
[QUOTE=UK Bohemian;51756200]has multiculturalism made the world a [I]nicer[/I] place?[/QUOTE]
It's given me most of my family
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.