Leftist Militants….
So the French decided to say “no” to the EU Constitution…basically putting a wrench into formal European unification and cooperation for the time being.
I was reading the article from a quick AP news blurb. As a part of the article are small pictures of French people demonstrating their feelings against the EU Constitution. A 30-something in a poorly chosen izod shirt with the collar flipped up smiling carrying a sign that says “Non” was captioned “Leftist militant speaks his mind about the EU Constitution.” An old man in wornout tweed jacket and an old-man leather hat talking to a reporter was captioned “Leftist militant concerned over loss of French national identity.” A 40-ish woman with glasses, a bread and wine belly, a big grin and thumbs up was captioned “Leftist militant celebrates victory in French referendum.”
Here’s a topic to discuss amongst yourselves…Leftist Militants in France are neither Leftist nor militant…discuss.
The fact that the French voted to be more nationalistic, inward looking, and xenophobic is not Left…that’s extreme Right, like Pat Buchannen-style right.
Maybe I’m showing my right-wing ignorance here, but isn’t that a perversion of what the entire Leftist movement is supposed to be about? Or is the AP just completely in the dark?
Sunday, May 29th, 2005 @ 9:44 pm 
General, Politics, the Left, the Stupid
RSS 2.0
Trackback
May 31st, 2005 at 9:38 am
I just did some more reading about it all and it seems that the French opponents were worried that the new constitution gave too much power to the individual states and was more free-market than they wanted. British opponents, on the other hand, were worried about losing national identity by granting too much power to the Union.
So, the French opposition is largely left, where the Brits are more right.
It’s really facinating to watch all this… it’s obviously not precisely like what happened here, but some of the arguments must have been similar, and I feel like this EU process must offer some insight into the early days of the US.
I feel like it’s going to be even harder, since these nations all have such a long history… I can very much understand the conflicts of identity. Very exciting in a lot of ways.
June 1st, 2005 at 1:06 am
As Americans, we face some difficulty in accurately identifying continental European thinking as “leftist” or “liberal.” Out there, the “liberal” moniker hasn’t strayed as much from its Enlightenment roots (read: free market, free individual, free bird). So we, to our credit, have gotten used to this to some extent. So when Reuters et al actually get it RIGHT and say, “leftists reject EU charter,” we’re left confused. After you blink a few times and process everything, you’re left with K’s above analysis.
The only thing that seems to have a universally agreed-upon meaning is “X-trEEEm right-wing neonazi.”
June 1st, 2005 at 4:23 am
Excellent points. But that still doesn’t explain the use of “millitant.” Sensationalism is just a nicer shade of misrepresentation which is the dressed up little sister of deceit (”fair and balanced?”).
June 1st, 2005 at 11:51 am
That’s definitely true. I don’t consider someone a “militant” until they’re holdnig a weapon, or at least rioting.
Sensationalism is a bigger problem than any sort of possible inherent bias that exists (which I think is bunk anyway) in the media.
June 1st, 2005 at 10:02 pm
An inherent bias? It is good to hear you think such a term is ludicrous. But truly, people who don’t talk about why they believe a particular thing will then fall back upon an inherent nature, and thus, sensationalism.
An aside — at work today, I had the opportunity to listen to Right Radio. I don’t know who the guy was, but it’s amazing how much they yell, scream, and bitch about whatever tickles their macho male fancy. They * are * sensationalism; when I realize that, and note how many people carry their flag, something in me dies inside and I decide I should really go into politics or look for lunar beachfront property.