This is why I love French workers

Edric O · July 13, 2009

Because they won't take sh*t from anyone:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8148198.stm

Workers at a factory about to be closed in France have threatened to blow it up unless they receive higher severance pay. Now this is what I call class struggle! :)

D2k Sardaukar · July 13, 2009

I guess they were like... if we go down... we go down with a BANG... a big... B-A-N-G!!!

;D

Anathema · July 15, 2009

Conversely, it's what I dislike about the French mindset. Civil servants, farmers, factory workers and pretty much everyone else feel that they're entitled to the way of living they've grown accostumed. If the company/institution that employs them can afford them no longer due to dropping income, or if their agricultural products are too expensive then it's up to the government to pass the bill to the taxpayer. Productivity and economic viability be damned, I deserve my 50.000 paycheck and my 10 weeks of vacation and if I don't get it I'll burn something to the ground! (and the blood is on Sarkozy, too!)

Other examples of the French proletariat in action:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-grapes-of-wrath-depressed-french-wine-producers-bomb-government-offices-530798.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/judges-clear-way-for-exporters-to-sue-over-beef-blockades-1287885.html

Sneakgab · July 15, 2009

The government does not need to pass the bill to all taxpayers, just the rich.

''Productivity and economic viability be damned, I deserve my 50.000 paycheck and my 10 weeks of vacation and if I don't get it I'll burn something to the ground! (and the blood is on Sarkozy, too!)''

Like most people would honestly care about ''economic viability'' and productivity when their standard or living is challenged (I know the bankers and their credit happy session indicated how much they care about economic viability, and how productive is the policy of shutting down factories whenever the profit ratio on your investment is no longer satisfactory. Of course, the bad behavior of one does nothing to justify that of another, but you mentioned specifically only the workers while the French bourgeoise almost certainly did the things I mentioned earlier, so I just thought I'd remind you of it). Give me a break. They would threaten to do ''bad'' things if they felt such action best served their best interests... or... are you changing you mind yet again on that selfish human nature thing? (assuming that, like most capitalists you believe such)

Also, just to note that speaking of paychecks and vacation is a bit off, because this seems to be about severance wage (I guess they will be getting all the ''vacation'' time they want). Just to note that the amount is 30000 euros. Also take into account that though this is what they are asking for, it is said that it is typical in these situations to start with a number than what is higher than what they reasonably expect. Right now they are getting much less than that (according to article)

Anathema · July 15, 2009

or... are you changing you mind yet again on that selfish human nature thing?

Of course not. It's not just that they're selfish (everyone is, to a degree) but that they're completely unembarrassed about showing it and that they're short sighted as well.

If you think that this sort of "bargaining behaviour" is good, it's still not a trait of the French working class. People in France, poor or rich, would sooner tolerate the establishment of a military junta than sacrifice a week of vacation or 2% of their yearly income. If you think that's an exaggeration, count the times when French workers or farmers resorted to terrorism to safeguard their "rights" versus the times they came in action against domestic coups (the most recent one being in 1958)

And this has squat to do with class struggle, much less with international solidarity between workers. One of my links mentioned the Spanish strawberry episode. When Spain, a country wich was lagging behind because of decades of relative isolation, entered the European Community their farmers tried to make an honest buck by exporting vegetables and fruit to other EC countries. In France their products were intercepted and destroyed by vigilantes who didn't want to see their livilyhood compromised by a bunch of foreign peasants.

Also, just to note that speaking of paychecks and vacation is a bit off, because this seems to be about severance wage (I guess they will be getting all the ''vacation'' time they want). Just to note that the amount is 30000 euros. Also take into account that though this is what they are asking for, it is said that it is typical in these situations to start with a number than what is higher than what they reasonably expect. Right now they are getting much less than that (according to article)

I know, severance payments are obviously a larger issue then a small pay increase or an extra day of vacation. My point was that French people would burn, kidnap, terrorise and hold the entire country hostage for a lot less than that.

Edric O · July 16, 2009

Conversely, it's what I dislike about the French mindset. Civil servants, farmers, factory workers and pretty much everyone else feel that they're entitled to the way of living they've grown accostumed.

If you don't act like you're entitled to what you have, then you will lose it.

Why should workers accept a drop in living standards if they haven't done anything wrong? Because the market says so? To hell with the market.

If the company/institution that employs them can afford them no longer due to dropping income, or if their agricultural products are too expensive then it's up to the government to pass the bill to the taxpayer.

Actually, in the case I posted, the workers are not demanding anything from the government. They are demanding more money from the private company that employed them.

When the capitalist economy falls into a recession, or when things go badly for a company for whatever reason, someone has to pay. Either the workers must pay, or the owners must pay. The workers are always asked to pay and suffer the most, usually by losing their jobs. What I admire about French workers is that they won't take it lying down, and they strike back at the owners saying "no, YOU pay!"

You think it's normal that we have recessions, layoffs and unemployment. I think these are great unnecessary evils caused by capitalism, and the more the capitalists are asked to pay for them, the better.

Productivity and economic viability be damned, I deserve my 50.000 paycheck and my 10 weeks of vacation and if I don't get it I'll burn something to the ground! (and the blood is on Sarkozy, too!)

Yes, productivity be damned. Productivity is not good for its own sake. We should not produce stuff for the sake of producing stuff. Productivity is good only to the extent that it promotes the happiness of the people. And if the people prefer to have longer vacations and shorter hours instead of more consumer junk... then who are you to argue? The French know that you're supposed to work to live, not live to work.

Of course not. It's not just that they're selfish (everyone is, to a degree) but that they're completely unembarrassed about showing it and that they're short sighted as well.

Capitalists are selfish, and completely unembarrassed about showing it, so the workers should reply in kind. It's funny how liberals expect the workers, but not the capitalists, to make sacrifices for the greater good.

If you think that this sort of "bargaining behaviour" is good, it's still not a trait of the French working class. People in France, poor or rich, would sooner tolerate the establishment of a military junta than sacrifice a week of vacation or 2% of their yearly income. If you think that's an exaggeration, count the times when French workers or farmers resorted to terrorism to safeguard their "rights" versus the times they came in action against domestic coups (the most recent one being in 1958)

Err, that was 51 years ago - quite a long time - and the result was the creation of the Fifth Republic, not a "military junta".

And this has squat to do with class struggle, much less with international solidarity between workers. One of my links mentioned the Spanish strawberry episode. When Spain, a country wich was lagging behind because of decades of relative isolation, entered the European Community their farmers tried to make an honest buck by exporting vegetables and fruit to other EC countries. In France their products were intercepted and destroyed by vigilantes who didn't want to see their livilyhood compromised by a bunch of foreign peasants.

"French farmers" are not some sort of monolithic entity with a single mind (and I was talking about workers, rather than farmers). I agree that the Spanish strawberry incident, and the farmers who participated in that, had nothing to do with class struggle or international solidarity. But that does not mean that other actions taken by other farmers (or workers) at other times can't be about class struggle or international solidarity.

I know, severance payments are obviously a larger issue then a small pay increase or an extra day of vacation. My point was that French people would burn, kidnap, terrorise and hold the entire country hostage for a lot less than that.

And that is a good thing. The government should be afraid of the people.

Edric O · July 27, 2009

Hmmm, it would appear that (some) Chinese workers are officially more awesome than the French:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/china/article6728604.ece

Dante · July 28, 2009

In hindsight, I should really have seen that coming when I opened the newspaper today.

Edric O · July 28, 2009

The more workers fight their bosses, the more I approve. :)

Dante · July 28, 2009

Extending to murder?

Edric O · July 29, 2009

Given that the boss in question was just about to take an action that would have certainly resulted in death by starvation for many workers and their family members - yes. Absolutely yes.

It's not murder, it's justice.

Dante · July 29, 2009

"It's ok because he was a bad person" ?

Or worse, "It's ok because he was about to do something bad" ?

Edric O · July 29, 2009

Yes. Those are perfectly good reasons. I don't see the problem. Remember, I uphold utilitarianism. If you can save many by killing one, then it is not only acceptable, but morally required to kill that one person. Otherwise you'd be allowing many more people to die, which would be far worse.

Besides, we're not talking about laws or principles of state here. We are talking about what people should do in the course of a ruthless class struggle with their lives on the line. It would be rather difficult to have a revolution without using lethal force against capitalists, wouldn't you say? And if they don't like it - well, they should have thought about that before they began exploiting workers.

Let me put it this way: Being a capitalist is a crime. Normally, in a court of law, it does not merit the death penalty. Just like rape, for example, does not merit the death penalty. However, if a rapist gets killed by his victim in the act, then that counts as self-defense, and the actions of the victim are perfectly justified. Similarly, if a capitalist gets killed by workers in the act (i.e. while being a capitalist, not some time after he no longer holds that status), then that also counts as self-defense, and the actions of the workers are perfectly justified.

chatfsh · July 29, 2009

Did a cold chill just run down anyone else

Edric O · July 29, 2009

Only if you think that being a capitalist is not as bad as being a rapist or a robber. I do not. I believe that capitalists merit exactly the same treatment as other types of criminals. I do not mean any kind of arbitrary sentencing, mind you. Ideally, after the revolution, they should all be tried in a court of law with full rights to representation and the presumption of innocence. It may well be that some of them were forced into their roles of capitalists by circumstances, or that they did not hold for themselves profits higher than a worker's wage (many small business owners are in this position, for example). In that case, they should be found innocent.

But many others should be found guilty. And of course some may suffer retribution from workers, which, as I've said, is a form of self-defense.

If you find any of this unsettling, that is simply because you do not see capitalists as doing anything wrong. I do. We communists in general do. That is all there is to it.

Dante · July 29, 2009

Regardless of how one feels about capitalists, I believe that grand ideals can be betrayed by little injustices. And I believe that if you advocate equality for everyone, that extends to legal proceedings where necessary in any and all circumstances.

Also, I am vehemently opposed to utilitarianism.

Would I let a thousand people die to save one? Maybe. Depends who they were.

chatfsh · July 29, 2009

If you find any of this unsettling, that is simply because you do not see capitalists as doing anything wrong. I do. We communists in general do. That is all there is to it.

Do you approve of the methods utilized by Lenin and the Bolsheviks, particularly during the Red Terror? Just trying to figure out how deeply this runs with you...

Edric O · July 29, 2009

Do you approve of the methods utilized by Lenin and the Bolsheviks, particularly during the Red Terror? Just trying to figure out how deeply this runs with you...

Didn't I just say I want the capitalists to get a fair trial?

So the answer to your question is no. The Red Terror was over the top, and unnecessary. At the same time, however, there was a civil war going on against the Bolsheviks, so a certain degree of violence was unavoidable. But they shouldn't have created the Cheka and given it extra-legal powers. That was a phenomenally bad idea.

On another note... You do realize that capitalism was instituted in most countries by similar methods, right? Even the American Revolution wasn't exactly all friendly and bloodless.

chatfsh · July 29, 2009

So the answer to your question is no. The Red Terror was over the top, and unnecessary. At the same time, however, there was a civil war going on against the Bolsheviks, so a certain degree of violence was unavoidable. But they shouldn't have created the Cheka and given it extra-legal powers. That was a phenomenally bad idea.

Phew! Glad to hear it.

On another note... You do realize that capitalism was instituted in most countries by similar methods, right? Even the American Revolution wasn't exactly all friendly and bloodless.

Of course the American Revolutionary War was bloody, thus the war bit. But it wasn

Edric O · July 29, 2009

Regardless of how one feels about capitalists, I believe that grand ideals can be betrayed by little injustices. And I believe that if you advocate equality for everyone, that extends to legal proceedings where necessary in any and all circumstances.

But that's exactly what I said... Exploiting workers (i.e. being a capitalist) should be considered a crime, and people accused of it should get a fair trial like all other people accused of crimes. Also, as with other crimes, the victims should be allowed to use force in self-defense.

Phew! Glad to hear it.

We're nice people, you know. :) Well, actually, I think most present day communists are too nice, but even the old trigger-happy ones like Lenin were motivated by the idea that they had to be ruthless because their enemies were.

And we do learn from our mistakes... The 20th century was ours to win. It's quite embarrassing that we lost. We will not make the same errors a second time.

Of course the American Revolutionary War was bloody, thus the war bit. But it wasn

Dante · July 29, 2009

I never said that. :P

Also, murder is excessive force.

chatfsh · July 29, 2009

I never said that. :P

But turnabout is fair play.:)

Edric - I

Edric O · July 29, 2009

Edric - I

Dante · July 29, 2009

But turnabout is fair play.:)

If you tried it, perhaps, though imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I'm not sure why Edric would attribute anything you said to me though.

Edit: Personally, I'm not sure there is such a thing as a good cause for war. Or rather, I don't think anyone who claims to place any value in human life can also justify war.

Edric O · July 29, 2009

I'm not sure why Edric would attribute anything you said to me though.

I copy and paste quote tags... and didn't realize my mistake until just now. At first I had no idea what you meant by "I never said that". Whoops. :)

Edit: Personally, I'm not sure there is such a thing as a good cause for war. Or rather, I don't think anyone who claims to place any value in human life can also justify war.

Again, the answer lies in utilitarianism. If human life has value, than surely more lives have greater value than fewer lives, so a war is justified if it saves more lives than it takes.

Sign In

This is why I love French workers

Recommended Posts

Edric O

D2k Sardaukar

Anathema

Sneakgab

Anathema

Edric O

Edric O

Dante

Edric O

Dante

Edric O

Dante

Edric O

chatfsh

Edric O

Dante

chatfsh

Edric O

chatfsh

Edric O

Dante

chatfsh

Edric O

Dante

Edric O

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information