http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/0,5538,PB64-SUQ9MTMwMDQmbnI9Mw_3_3,00.html">

what makes me a little bit optimistic ,that the workers ,leaded by their unions, and the students were marching close together.

is this the begining of a new movement against the ideas of governments,prompting by the capitalistic graspers ? 

france seeems really unstable to me.

i think the chance of revolution is greater in france than in any other european nation.

2 major riots in recent memory is a bad sign.

 I am sure the same was said of the us in the late sixties.  The French are tough, they will get it together.

thats true.

at the time the soviet union was winning the cold war, riots were all over hte USA, there were terrorist groups running around all over the place, vietnam was hot as ever....

The French take to the streets to protest every so often.  It has been like that for a couple of hundred years, and France is still here.

As for the neo-con employment law, employment "at will" is the rule just about everywhere except some parts of Europe.  Why would these kids think they should be guaranteed a job?  That is just self interest and has nothing to do with social responsibility.

sorry ,genghis,unemloyment is so high ,like in germany and other european countries cause the capitalist and their shareholders took the chance after the fall off the wall to screw down the thumbscrews of social systems only with threats to hut down the production or transfer it to china where the workers work for a few cents under dishonorable circumstancies.and ,denghis ,as you said the company doesn't need the worker ,but does the worker really needs a company like that. no, get rid of those bloodsuckers. it's time for revolution !!!!

This shows that people in France have an actuall interest about politics and their future.It can only and only be positive when you see young people protesting for their rights.

         I am not so sure that they[the rioters] see this as a rights issue as much as they think it an "entitlement" issue. And there is a huge difference between the two. 

According to the news, the French governemnt is most likely to cave in to the public unrest, and change their proposals. Hurrah.

Typical tyrany by majority.
Go Dominique! Unleash that Sarkozy, he'll deal with the unrully mob!

Seriously, sometimes governments do harsh things for the greater good.

"Power is of too much importance to be left in the hands of the people" - Winston Churchill

An "entitlement" issue would not drove more than 1.000.000 people to the streets.

           workers throw off your chains ???????

  Not New, Not believable, Heard it before, BS then, BS now.

  [We need beylerbei for some authenticity anyway]  

    Assoc. Press-   500,000 in 160 cities.   And considering these are mainly students or younger people, yes, an entitlement issue would do that.

As a young person, I can tell you most people are my age are complete morons who believe stupid idealistic nonsense like this "I'm a human so I deserve a job and 8 months of paid vacation and 100% insurance coverage of all kinds even if I work at McDonald's."

I can only hope when they graduate college and start working that life will bite them in the ass and wake them up.

Choke*Gasp*Sputter*...

 Did you actually mention social responsibility in connection with neo-con philosophy.

Although i still  believe it is a much bigger number, the new law treats French youth as trush.

The right to work is a fundamental human right.

If you say the workers don't need a company like that, then the French should not be bitching about how all such companies have left their country and taken their jobs with them.  They can have all the "social justice" they want if they're willing to sacrifice for it.

 I like to see social protests over issues of importance, I like what Genghis said above too.

...Villepin says will alleviate France's sky-high youth unemployment by getting companies to risk hiring young workers. Quote from A.P. in yahoo.

This makes sense. Letting go of workers is so easy in the US that we do not have the same sympathies that many Europeans do. If younger means cheaper then go for it. At least they would be offered jobs that are now supposedly filled by those with seniority.

However, the issue of layoffs and such is a global problem. Tends to follow how effective one is in the market. The less effective have to resort to dire methods to stay in the game.

What about the right of a business owner to conduct his business and use his property to provide for himself and his family?  For every person who forcibly provide a job for you enslave a business owner.  And furthermore, this law doesn't get rid of that right, if anything it will allow more people to exercise this right.

I don't even think this is a right though, this is just another example of the proliferation of "rights" which are really just "desires" people have.

I am glad America hasn't fallen for that unjust logic, that is a right we can do without.

Getting rid of workers has become a way of maximizing profits in the short term in North America. This can't go on forever and probably shouldn't be used as a model for a sustainable economy.

If a worker doesn't produce profit, he or she should be fired, enslaving industry into providing employment when economically they shouldn't sure as hell isn't sustainable and in the long run will bring down everybody's standard of living.

I would venture a guess that everybody wants job security. Jobs, however, are created by those who are successfull in business. And the business savy have the option in how much wages to provide and how long to employ a person.

What about the right of a bysiness owner to conduct his bysiness and use his property to provide his for himself and his family?Well,at least he has a bysiness and property....

Downsizing your work force to eliminate payroll and benefits costs to make your quaterly report look better, increase your stock value and put a few million more into the pockets of your top executives makes no sense in the long term. In the end you're left with a shell of a company and if it's done on a wide enough scale the shell of an economy. But that's no problem you can just buy the cheaper product made from your operations you've moved overseas to areas where there's no such thing as workers rights. The only problem is less and less people can afford to buy them because their jobs are gone. Working at McDonalds for five bucks an hour really doesn't replace a $35 per hour job in an automotives plant.

Downsizing usually coincides with loss of market share or advances in technologies. Surely CEO's and administrators have reaped (greedily) the rewards of a perky job way out of proportion to the average worker of the same company. That is an area where penny pinching could help.

On the other hand, job availability and security follow the fluctuations of market economy. Trying to force a government to create a secure job market by protectionist methods doesn't seem to be cost effective.

You can't encase you're economy in cement in an attempt to stablilize it, that is true. Companies still have responsibilities in regards to their workforce and the economies they perform in. Profit taking on a large scale is destructive to an economy over a long enough period of time. 

And it's not in a state of equilibrium, it's getting worse.

      Could someone, in Europe, preferably, give us an accurate brief of the proposed law?   I have just been looking to reread it and can't find anything that isn't tainted with O'Riely  style blusterings. 

If a CEO wants to do that, you have no right to stop him, it is his business and he can operate it as he sees fit, if workers don't like, they can quit and get a new job at somewhere with less earnings discrepancies, no one is forcing him to work there.

He wouldn't if people like you had your way.

Spartakus wrote    

The right to work is a fundamental human right.

The right to work is indeed basic.  We have a "right to work" law in the us.  However, there is nothing that obligates anyone to hire you or to maintain your employment except you!  Meaning your value to your employer- work ethic, skills, the tools that you own, education etc.

Legally you may be correct, but ethically is another matter. There are such things as antitrust laws to provide some stablity in an economy but as we've seen with Microsoft they're not very effective.

Seeing as how we're on  a thread dealing with France we can take their Revolution as an example of what happens when those at the top ignore the needs of the majority. I don't foresee beheadings in city squares becoming a regular event in North America, but when enough people get fed up with being screwed to the wall things will change. It's democracy after all, you've got to love it.

I was talking about the protestors, not the govt.

No one disputes that; they are just not GUARANTEED a job.

Are European forumers aware of something?  In the case of numerous multi-national corporations with operations in Europe and also North America, a disproportionate number of downsizings has impacted NA operations since workers can be fired.

It appears that European policymakers and managers have realized that since much of the economy that can be wrung out of NA already has been, it is time to start cutting out the deadwood at home.  The young are better able to adapt.  They will live.

It's completely ethical, a CEO doesn't enslave his workers, but what you are talking about would enslave the CEO.  As long as an employer doesn't abuse his workers physically, pays them the stated amount on time, and doesn't discriminate against them based on anything but their working ability, he can and should be allowed to do whatever he wants with his business.  Economically, he can't treat them too bad or no one will want to work for him, why do you think any employees get vacations and health insurance?  To lure valuable workers away from competitors. 

What you are saying violates the sacred Western principal of the inviolability of legal property and lawful profit, however I think that is what makes you like that course of action.

European middle classes seem to have this one backwards then. This so-called revolution is meant to keep the status quo. Doesn't that sound a little weird? I thought past revolutions around the world were designed to bring change. Protesting is one thing but keeping businesses from successfully competing is another.

They have vacations and health insurance because they have mfought the Class War and won some battles.

Hey man- There are no guarantees in life, someone wants a job they do what we all do, go and find one!!  No one gives you tools and skills, you learn and earn them.

But you live in the Basque region of Spain, do you not?

Sacred Western principal, are you joking. For much of our history it's been take what you can when you can and screw the other guy if he's not swift enough. The behaviour of many CEOs in recent history has led me to be sceptical as to their ethical qualities. How many Enrons, Worldcoms, Johnson and Johnsons or here in Canada Nortel and Holiger Inc., do we need before we really question the role of big business. It may not have started out that way but Enron became nothing more than a massive Ponzi scam. Take money from new investors pay a little back to previous investors and pocket the remainder. It works great as long as you have new money coming in but falls like a house of cards when theres not.

Only A few years ago the head of the New York stock exchange made over $100 million a years. After all the auditing scandals his pay dropped to $3 million. I could go on and on but what's the point. I don't like this kind of behaviour because it's damaging to an economy over time. I believe in reasonable compensation for executives but not the astronomical payoffs that some have been taking. I makes people disillusioned and they stop trusting the market.

but be sure , the working class ,middle class and other "loosers" of the globalisation will strike back, much sooner then others are thinking.

The good ol' gravy train. Hope we could all  have it so good. You make it sound like some of us didn't have it rough. The road to financial security is a difficult ride. Even then their are no gaurantees.

Revolutions have power when the movement crosses gender, age and most socio-economic barriers. Otherwise who will support it?

Back to reality. What change do you presume will come about from the French fight on this. For France's own good the protests better not be successfull. Her financial future is at stake. For some, an oppurtunity to get jobs they never had. For most a competitive spirit to keep the French economy on a steady course. Without that the subsidies will last only so long. That's my take on it.

Don't call me an idiot, I never call you one.  On the map, where you live would lie within the borders of Spain, would it not?

That is white collar crime that police forces exist to take care of.  People free load on social programs, but you'd just love to take gobs of money and put it into those programs anyway.  You would say that a few bad apples don't make the entire program bad.  I would certainly say the same thing about capitalism, a few scams don't invalidate the entire fundamental structure of the economy.  And you obviously are being naive if you think getting rid of capitalism will get rid of the combination of greed and ingenuity that results in scams like Enron and such.

I see your point, but I still don't care.

And you're being naive if you believe that shareholders are going to sit back indefinately while they get repeatedly fleeced.

They don't sit back, they dump bad stocks and ruin the company that fleeced them, and then sue.  Scams perpetrated by CEO's are still scams and should be treated the same way, through a court of law, not through idealistic social engineering programs.

Or they actually take back their rights and demand that the people working for them(CEOs,CFOs, etc...) really do work for them and stop lining their own pockets. No more $15 million dollar non-repayable loans and such.

If the shareholders don't like it, the Board of directors can stop it, don't blame "the establishment" for what the board of directors of Fortune 500 companies do or don't do.

They are "the establishment".

 Commie strikers are the plague of France. These people tend to live in an alternate reality. They want to suck life out of the state. Parasite if you tell me. If it was up to me I'll turn France into a police state. let's just hope the Government (which is very cowardly) will not give way to those hippies demand. 

 France need the FN desperately.

What major riot, they burnt a kiosk and was surrounded by the police and some of them get the hell beaten out of them.

The police is getting better than ever, lets hope they employ more drastic tactics when the foreign element of France rebels again. Send them to french Guiana, all commies and bad immigrants.

What about getting rid of fascists like you? It would be a much better job for humanity.

As for the riots, they can be considered rather reactive than being revolutionary but it's like winning a further position on the battlefield against neoliberalism. Just rejecting unfair contracting conditions within  the so-called free market isn't enough; it's like attacking the means of production rather than changing the mode of production. I think only if the very existance of capitalism is questionned, a step will be taken in order to end the injustice. If we don't reject the paradigm, but only the unfair contracting conditions, we will continue to hear nonsense arguments like "What about the profit-making right of the entrepreneurs?!" etc. 

Cheers to that.

I can think of one French ruler who would know what should be done with these people

I'll rather go down in the flame of glory rather than succomb to commies and foreigners who only seek to destroy us.

 LePen is right, Europe is what keep us down. That's why nowadays you are seeing a wave of french protectionism. The anglo-saxons have succeeded to destroy the EU, I'm disgusted by the behaviours of Europeans who allow this to happen. France must go on her own.

Call me fascist or racist, but we will not go down without a fight.

There message is crystal clear. The sons of Normans, Francilians, Aquitanian, Gascons, Burgundians and Breton will gather together and will strike the fanatical horde just like Martel did.

Don't pay much attention to the Turk. The FN is a nationalist party that is anti-immigration and on the right. The FN is comparable to the US republicans, whereas the Gaullist party will be the equivalent of the democrats but a little more to the left.

In other word the FN wants France to stay French. what's wrong with that.  Of course a turk would want France to become a muslim country. Over my dead body.

I don't think so. I think it's  rewarding women for being traditional mothers who are the slaves of patriarchy. 

I doubt the pragmatic French will elect Le Pen to high office.  In frustration, they may say one thing in polls or interviews and vote otherwise in an election.

Admittedly, it is becoming a long time since the days of Action Francaise and the Vichy government.  After a couple of generations those memories tend to become ancient history.

Originally posted by Maharbbal Hi, Back to the demonstrations: Saterday, police almost killed one man. Sorbonne is now turned into a medieval castle guarded by about 500 anti-riot soldiers Hope we will be able to work soon. Bye

Well when you decide to disturb the peace and engage in criminal activities, you are very likely to get hurt. Hope he wasn't badly hurt, but had he died his blood would have been on his own hands. Crime doesn't pay.

By the way mods being pro-police and pro-order isn't racist. I don't know why right wing views aren't accepted. (I'm not even on the right)

However, when the number of mothers declaring independence may increase, I think the number of "traditional mothers of the sacred family" would increase in a much faster way.