Living in France under Macron

Isabella

The queen of "Bazella"
Orange Room Supporter
Next they'll enlighten us on how you have a very high probability of getting robbed in Barbes!
 

Isabella

The queen of "Bazella"
Orange Room Supporter
Well apparently I was right in questioning the motivations behind this article ^_^ this is the response from the ladies who live in the area

Les habitantes du quartier La Chapelle répondent au journal «Le Parisien», par F. Roy
Reprenant une campagne de stigmatisation des réfugiés orchestrée par les Républicains, un article du Parisien prétend que le quartier La Chapelle (18° arrondissement) serait dangereux pour les femmes. Les habitantes répondent dans une vidéo: le problème ce n'est pas les réfugiés, c'est votre propagande xénophobe qui salit notre vie de quartier !

Un article sorti dans le Parisien en fin de semaine affirme qu'une partie du quartier La Chapelle serait interdite aux femmes par la présence de trop nombreux hommes dans la rue, pour ne pas parler des réfugiés. L'article est immédiatement repris par les médias, comme RTL, France Info... Et vendredi 19 mai 2017 le collectif SOS La Chapelle, des élus LR et Valérie Pécresse se réunissent aux pieds du métro La Chapelle pour en appeler à l'intervention immédiate du nouveau gouvernement. Valérie Pécresse propose aussi une aide à la sécurité à tous ceux qui ont peur. Un budget sorti tout droit des caisses du Conseil régional d'Ile de France et dont la Mairie de Paris ne voudrait pas selon Mme Pécresse. Bref, le feu aux poudres.

Pourtant les habitantes ne reconnaissent pas leur quartier dans ces propos et "ne se sentent pas concernées".


Les femmes de la chapelle © F. Roy/ Salaam Quand même
Elles expriment être "mal à l'aise" non pas par la présence des migrants, qui sont discrets et plutôt protecteurs envers les femmes, mais vis à vis de cette polémique qui a pris une dimension nationale en quelques heures. Elles ne comprennent pas ce qu'elles nomment être une "manipulation" dont les visées sont "clairement politiciennes à l'approche des législatives", et dont les propos sont étonnement repris par tous les média sans contre-enquête.




Appel à mobilisation le 24 Mai à 18 heures, face au journal Le Parisien, 25 Avenue Michelet, 93400 Saint-Ouen.



What people are trying to make it look like is that this is a Syrian refugee issue... It definitely is not the case! Total political crap!

Yes the neighbourhood sucks but it has always sucked! It didn't just suddenly start sucking a year ago! And the inhabitants of the area are going to be protesting the parisien awww! Looks like the LR can't just spread any crap they want :O
 

Indie

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter

How actual women who live in the area feel like ^_^

Rigghhhttttt...

So many comments I could make but I'll limit myself to the last lady. She and the woman behind the camera are calling each other by their first names, in a way that makes it obvious that they know each other. This is definitely not a journalist interviewing random people on the street.

And lol @ the same lady asking: "what makes them think France is theirs?"

Uhhhh...I guess because they're French and France is their country!
 

Indie

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter


MAY 22, 2017
All Power to the Banks! The Winners-Take-All Regime of Emmanuel Macron
by DIANA JOHNSTONE

Screen-Shot-2017-04-21-at-7.35.25-AM.png

Photo by Blandine Le Cain | CC BY 2.0

A ghost of the past was the real winner of the French presidential election. Emmanuel Macron won only because a majority felt they had to vote against the ghost of “fascism” allegedly embodied by his opponent, Marine Le Pen. Whether out of panic or out of the need to feel respectable, the French voted two to one in favor of a man whose program most of them either ignored or disliked. Now they are stuck with him for five years.

If people had voted on the issues, the majority would never have elected a man representing the trans-Atlantic elite totally committed to “globalization”, using whatever is left of the power of national governments to weaken them still further, turning over decision-making to “the markets” – that is, to international capital, managed by the major banks and financial institutions, notably those located in the United States, such as Goldman-Sachs.

The significance of this election is so widely misrepresented that clarification requires a fairly thorough explanation, not only of the Macron project, but also of what the (impossible) election of Marine Le Pen would have meant.

From a Two Party to a Single Party System

Despite the multiparty nature of French elections, for the past generation France has been essentially ruled by a two-party system, with government power alternating between the Socialist Party, roughly the equivalent of the U.S. Democratic Party, and a party inherited from the Gaullist tradition which has gone through various name changes before recently settling on calling itself Les Républicains (LR), in obvious imitation of the United States. For decades, there has been nothing “socialist” about the Socialist Party and nothing Gaullist about The Republicans. In reality, both have adopted neoliberal economic policies, or more precisely, they have followed European Union directives requiring member states to adopt neoliberal economic policies. Especially since the adoption of the common currency, the euro, a little over fifteen years ago, those economic policies have become tangibly harmful to France, hastening its deindustrialization, the ruin of its farmers and the growing indebtedness of the State to private banks.

This has had inevitable political repercussions. The simplest reaction has been widespread reaction against both parties for continuing to pursue the same unpopular policies. The most thoughtful reaction has been to start realizing that it is the European Union itself that imposes this unpopular economic conformism.

To quell growing criticism of the European Union, the well-oiled Macron machine, labeled “En Marche!” has exploited the popular reaction against both governing parties. It has broken and absorbed large parts of both, in an obvious move to turn En Marche! into a single catch-all party loyal to Macron.

The destruction of the Socialist Party was easy. Since the “Socialist” government was so unpopular that it could not hope to win, it was easy to lure prominent members of that party to jump the sinking ship and rally to Macron, who had been economics minister in that unpopular government, but who was advertised by all the media as “new” and “anti-system”.

Weakening the Republicans was trickier. Thanks to the deep unpopularity of the outgoing Socialist government, the Republican candidate, François Fillon, looked like a shoo-in. But despite his pro-business economic policies, Fillon still cared about preserving France, and favored an independent foreign policy including good relations with Russia. It is unknown who dug into old records to come up with information about the allegedly fake jobs Fillon gave to his wife and children in past years, and how they were passed on the weekly Canard Enchainé to be revealed at a critical moment in the campaign. The uproar drowned out the issues. To an electorate already wary of “establishment politicians”, these revelations were fatal. The impression that “politicians are all corrupt” played into the hands of Emmanuel Macron, too young to have done anything worse than make a few quick millions during his passage through the Rothschild Bank, and there’s nothing illegal about that.

In France, the presidential election is followed by parliamentary elections, which normally give a majority to the party of the newly elected president. But Macron had no party, so he is creating one for the occasion, made up of defectors from the major defeated parties as well as his own innovation, candidates from “civil society”, with no political experience, but loyal to him personally. These “civil society” newcomers tend to be successful individuals, winners in the game of globalized competition, who will have no trouble voting for anti-labor measures. Macron is thus confirming Marine Le Pen’s longstanding assertion that the two main parties were really one big single party, whose rhetorical differences masked their political convergence.

The Macron victory demoralized Republicans. Weakening them further, Macron named a Republican, Edouard Philippe, as his Prime Minister, in a government with four Socialist and two Republican, alongside his own selections from “civil society”.

Transforming France

Macron won in part because older voters in particular were frightened by his opponents’ hints at leaving the European Union, which they have been indoctrinated to consider necessary to prevent renewal of Europe’s old wars. But only the hysterical anti-fascist scare can explain why self-styled leftist “revolutionaries” such as François Ruffin, known for his successful anti-capitalist movie “Merci Patron”, could join the stampede to vote for Macron – promising to “oppose him later”. But how?

Later, after five years of Macron, opposition may be harder than ever. In recent decades, as manufacturing moves to low wage countries, including EU members such as Poland and Rumania, France has lost 40% of its industry. Loss of industry means loss of jobs and fewer workers. When industry is no longer essential, workers have lost their key power: striking to shut down industry. Currently the desperate workers in a failing auto-works factory in central France are threatening to blow it up unless the government takes measures to save their jobs. But violence is powerless when it has no price tag.

Emmanuel Macron has said that he wants to spend only a short time in political life, before getting back to business. He has a mission, and he is in a hurry. If he gains an absolute majority in the June parliamentary elections, he has a free hand to govern for five years. He means to use this period not to “reform” the country, as his predecessors put it, but to “transform” France into a different sort of country. If he has his way, in five years France will no longer be a sovereign nation, but a reliable region in a federalized European Union, following a rigorous economic policy made in Germany by bankers and a bellicose foreign policy made in Washington by neocons.

As usual, the newly elected French president’s first move was to rush to Berlin to assert loyalty to the increasingly lopsided “Franco-German partnership”. He was most warmly welcomed by Chancellor Angela Merkel, thanks to his clear determination to force through the austerity measures demanded by the Frankfurt budget masters. Macron hopes that his fiscal obedience will be rewarded by German consent to a European investment fund for stimulating economic growth, but this implies a degree of federalism that the pfennig-pinching Germans show little sign of accepting.

First of all, he has promised to complete the dismantling of the French labor code, which offers various protections to workers. This should save money for employers and the government. For Macron, the ruin of French industry and French farming seem to be welcome steps toward an economy of individual initiative, symbolized by startups.

The Macron program amounts to a profound ideological transformation of the French ideal of égalité, equality, from a horizontal concept, meaning equal benefits for all, to the vertical ideal of “equality of opportunity”, meaning the theoretical chance of every individual to rise above the others. This is an ideal easily accepted in the United States with its longstanding myth of the self-made man. The French have traditionally been logical enough to understand that everyone can’t rise above the others.

Horizontal equality in France has primarily meant institutional redistribution of wealth via universal access to benefits such as health care, pensions, communications and transportation facilities, allocations for families raising children, unemployment insurance, free education at all levels. These are the benefits that are under threat from the European Union in various ways. One way is the imposition of “competition” rules that impose privatization and favor foreign takeovers that transform public services into profit-seekers. Another is the imposition of public budget restrictions, along with the obligation of the State to seek private loans, increasing its debt, and the loss of tax revenue that all end up up making the State too poor to continue providing such services.

Very few French people would want to give up such horizontal equality for the privilege of hoping to become a billionaire.

Macron is sufficiently Americanized, or, to be more precise, globalized, to have declared that “there is no such thing as French culture”. From this viewpoint, France is just a place open to diverse cultures, as well as to immigrants and of course foreign capital. He has clearly signaled his rejection of French independence in the foreign policy field. Unlike his leading rivals, who all called for improved relations with Russia, Macron echoes the Russophobic line of the neocons. He broke tradition on his inauguration by riding down the Champs-Elysées in a military vehicle. A change of tone is indicated by his cabinet nominations. The title of the new foreign minister, Jean-Yves Le Drian, who served as defense minister in the Hollande government, is “Minister of Europe and of Foreign Affairs”, clearly giving Europe preference in the matter. Sylvie Goulard, an ardent Europeist who has remarked that “she does not feel French”, has been named Minister of Armies and Minister of Defense. Clearly national defense is an afterthought, when the main idea is to deploy the armed forces in various joint Western interventions.

The Divided Opposition

Unless the June parliamentary elections produce stunning surprises, the opposition to Macron’s catch-all governance party appears weak and fatally divided. The Socialist Party is almost wiped out. The Republicans are profoundly destabilized. Genuine opposition to the Macron regime can only be based on defense of French interests against EU economic dictates, starting with the euro, which prevents the country from pursuing an independent economic and foreign policy. In short, the genuine opposition must be “souverainiste”, concerned with preserving French sovereignty.

Two strong personalities emerged from the presidential election as potential leaders of that opposition: Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Le Pen. But they are drastically divided.

Mélenchon ran a spectacularly popular campaign, leaving the Socialist Party far behind (the party he personally left behind years ago). Initially, as he seemed to be taking votes away from Le Pen as well as from the Socialists, he got friendly media coverage, but as he came closer to making it to the decisive second round, the tone started to change. Just as Le Pen was finally knocked out as a “fascist”, there is little doubt that had Mélenchon been Macron’s challenger, he would have been increasingly denounced as “communist”.

Mélenchon is intelligent enough to have realized that the social policies he advocates cannot be achieved unless France recovers control of its currency. He therefore took a stand against both NATO and the euro. So did Marine Le Pen. Mélenchon was embarrassed by the resemblance between their two programs, and contrary to other eliminated candidates, refrained from endorsing Macron, instead calling on his movement, La France Insoumise, to choose between Macron and abstention. Finally, 25% of Mélenchon voters abstained in the second round, but 62% voted for Macron – almost exclusively motivated by the alleged need to “stop fascism”. That compares with the final total results of 66% for Macron and 34 % for Le Pen.

That vote confirmed the impossibility of forming a unified souverainiste opposition and allows Marine Le Pen to strengthen her claim to be the leader of a genuine opposition to Macron. She has admitted her own mistakes in the campaign, particularly in her debate with Macron, who beat her hands down with his arrogant performance as the economic expert. But despite her mere 34%, she retains the most loyal base of supporters in a changing scene. The problem for Mélenchon is that his electorate is more versatile.

Despite his loud appeal to “youth”, Macron was elected by France’s huge population of old people. Among voters over 65, he won 80% against 20% for Le Pen. Marine Le Pen did best with the youngest age group, 18 to 24, winning 44% against Macron’s 56%[1].

The differences were also significant between socio-professional categories. Macron won a whopping 83% of the votes coming from the “superior socio-professional categories” – categories where the “winners” in competitive society are largely ensconced. But in what are described as “categories populaires”, a French term for ordinary folk, with less education, the vote was 53% in favor of Le Pen. And she confirmed her position as favorite candidate of the working class, winning 63% of workers’ votes.

Note that the “superior socio-professional categories” are where the significance of these results will be defined. Individuals from that category – journalists, commentators and show business personalities – are all in a position to spread the word that this vote indicates that the workers must be “racist”, and therefore that we have narrowly escaped being taken over by “fascism”.

One of the many odd things about the latest French presidential election is the rejoicing among foreign “leftists” over the fact that the candidate of the rich roundly defeated the candidate of the poor. It used to be the other way around, but that was long ago. These days, the winners in the competitive game comfort themselves that they morally deserve their success, because they are in favor of diversity and against racism, whereas the less fortunate, the rural people and the working class, don’t deserve much of anything, because they must be “racist” to be wary of globalization.

The fact that Paris voted 90% for Macron is natural, considering that real estate prices have pushed the working class out of the capital, whose population is now overwhelmingly what is called “bobo” – the bohemian bourgeoisie, many of whom are employed in various branches of the dominant human rights ideology fabrication business: journalists, professors, teachers, consultants, the entertainment industry. In these milieux, hardly anyone would even dare speak a positive word about Marine Le Pen.

What if Marine Le Pen had won?

Since politics is largely fantasy, we may as well try to imagine the unimaginable: what if Marine Le Pen had won the election? This was never a realistic possibility, but it is worth imagining.

It could have had one, perhaps only one, extremely positive result: it could have freed France from its paralyzing obsession with the nonexistent “fascist threat”. The ghost would be exorcised. If the word has any meaning, “fascism” implies single party rule, whereas Marine Le Pen made clear her desire to govern by coalition, and selected the leader of a small Gaullist party, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, as her prospective prime minister. Poof! No fascism. That would have been an immeasurable benefit for political debate in France. At last genuine issues might matter. Real threats could be confronted.

Another advantage would have been the demise of the National Front. Since Marine Le Pen took over the notorious party founded by her reactionary father, it has kept a precarious balance between two opposing wings. There is the right wing in the southeast, along the Riviera, the bastion of the party’s founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen, a region represented in the outgoing parliament by his conservative granddaughter Marion Maréchal Le Pen. In the old industrial northeast region, between Arras and Lille, Marine Le Pen has built her own bastion, as champion of ordinary working people, where she won a majority of votes in the presidential election.

This is not the only time in history when an heiress has gone away with the heritage to join someone of whom her father disapproves. All those who want to cling to their comforting hatred of the left’s official Satan have trouble believing that Marine Le Pen broke with her reactionary father to go her own way (just as U.S. hawks couldn’t believe in Gorbachev). This change owes everything to her encounter with Florian Philippot, an intellectual who gave up on the ability of the Socialists to face the real issues. Marine has the personal qualities of a leader, and Philippot provided the intellectual substance she needed. Marine has decisively chosen Philippot as her advisor and co-leader, despite grumblings by Jean-Marie that she has been led astray by a gay Marxist. Had Marine won, her left wing would have been strengthened enough to enable her and Philippot to scrap the National Front and found a new “Patriot Party”. However, by scoring below 40%, she has weakened her authority and must try to hold the troublesome party together in order to win seats in the new parliament – which will not be easy.

Marine Le Pen would have tried to enact measures to save French industry and the jobs it provides, provide various benefits for low-income people, withdraw from NATO, and even promote a peaceful world, starting with friendly relations with Russia. She would even have begun to prepare her compatriots for escape from the euro.

But not to worry, none of this “fascist” program would ever have come to pass. If she had won, bands of protesting “antifascists” would have invaded the streets, smashing windows and attacking police. The outgoing Socialist government was preparing to use the resulting chaos as a pretext to stay in power long enough to manage the parliamentary elections[2], ensuring that President Marine Le Pen would be held in check. A “color revolution” was ready to be stirred up. The deep state is vigilant in NATOland.

Notes.

[1] According to poll of 7,752 representative voters by Le Figaro/LCI,

[2]Si Le Pen avait été élue… le plan secret pour ‘protéger la République’”, Le Nouvel Observateur, May 17, 2017

All Power to the Banks! The Winners-Take-All Regime of Emmanuel Macron
 

Isabella

The queen of "Bazella"
Orange Room Supporter
Rigghhhttttt...

So many comments I could make but I'll limit myself to the last lady. She and the woman behind the camera are calling each other by their first names, in a way that makes it obvious that they know each other. This is definitely not a journalist interviewing random people on the street.

And lol @ the same lady asking: "what makes them think France is theirs?"

Uhhhh...I guess because they're French and France is their country!

Lol this entire story is ridiculous the point behind it is entirely political, the last lady in the video was kinda stupid as well... But this news story ran its course all over media and it's not even factual! Their claim that things got worst in the past year because of refugees is entirely false, the area improved a lot in the past year actually!

This entire thing really is stupid! Heck you even participated in the discussion yourself when I was talking about it... You said that it improved because poor people were pushed out ^_^ hey check out the LR candidate for the area, first guy in the video lol that's one of the hipsters "pushing poor people out "
 

Abou Sandal

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
lol.....

Harcèlement à Chapelle-Pajol : De Hass suggère d'élargir les trottoirs (FRANCE INFO,21/05/17,7h32)


 

Iron Maiden

Paragon of Bacon
Orange Room Supporter
Remember when I talked about the area where I used to live that was full of drug addicts prostitutes and drug dealers, and where I saw cops beat people up every day??? Yup that's it, that's the area!

It has improved drastically from when I moved in in 2011, and when I left in 2015... and I question the motivations behind people making a big fuss about it now! That area has been known for quite some time to be an area where females would probably be harassed, and is generally unsafe, although to be honest I didn't think there was more harassment there than anywhere else in Paris lol! It did not change drastically from before lol! On the contrary actually it did improve quite a bit, at least now when I visit there are no hookers on the street corners and drug dealers have the decency to hide, or maybe some got arrested not sure! It does become worse towards Porte de la chapelle though since there are street vendors on top of everything else

Anyway seriously questioning the fact that this is becoming an issue right now! It was known since 2008 that the area was total shit

Ktashafo l baroud l jame3a!

Chou khass ktachafo el baroud..

There was apetition signed by a women's rights group from that area recently followed up by a protest march because its becoming worse and people cant take it anymore.
thats why its in the spotlight right now

Why u tackling this issues with bad faith?
 

Isabella

The queen of "Bazella"
Orange Room Supporter
Chou khass ktachafo el baroud..

There was apetition signed by a women's rights group from that area recently followed up by a protest march because its becoming worse and people cant take it anymore.
thats why its in the spotlight right now

Why u tackling this issues with bad faith?

Because this whole thing was done by LR, the aim is political, and the message they are sending is not reflective of the nature of the area... There is no alley where women are not allowed to walk! Or cafe where women are not allowed to sit, it's mass hysteria!

Once again I lived in the area for 4 years and I still frequent it often! I've never had issues walking alone at night or during the day for that matter! They are painting a very negative image now in order for it to make headlines before the legislatives! The cops are doing their job in the area and as previously stated it has improved quite a lot from when I first moved in!

So yeah this entire thing is a big stink and totally done in bad faith in my opinion


I'm not saying this area is great, I brought it up myself in our discussion in the other thread where you implied that I had no idea what life was like outside of paris' 2 hip neighbourhoods! It's not great, but the fact that it's not great is not remotely related to Syrian refugees which is the basic message they are sending with the original article! This area has been total crap since 2008 and has been known to be total crap since 2008
 

Iron Maiden

Paragon of Bacon
Orange Room Supporter
Because this whole thing was done by LR, the aim is political, and the message they are sending is not reflective of the nature of the area... There is no alley where women are not allowed to walk! Or cafe where women are not allowed to sit, it's mass hysteria!

Once again I lived in the area for 4 years and I still frequent it often! I've never had issues walking alone at night or during the day for that matter! They are painting a very negative image now in order for it to make headlines before the legislatives! The cops are doing their job in the area and as previously stated it has improved quite a lot from when I first moved in!

So yeah this entire thing is a big stink and totally done in bad faith in my opinion


I'm not saying this area is great, I brought it up myself in our discussion in the other thread where you implied that I had no idea what life was like outside of paris' 2 hip neighbourhoods! It's not great, but the fact that it's not great is not remotely related to Syrian refugees which is the basic message they are sending with the original article! This area has been total crap since 2008 and has been known to be total crap since 2008

The LR banked on it, because thats what political parties do, but it was not pushed by the LR. It was a womans group that signed the petition and sent it to hidalgo, pecresse and a whole bunch of other represntatives.

U might hav som emotionnal connection to that area because of reasons but its those people's right to vent their anger and when's a better time than to do it than before the elections.
 

Isabella

The queen of "Bazella"
Orange Room Supporter
The LR banked on it, because thats what political parties do, but it was not pushed by the LR. It was a womans group that signed the petition and sent it to hidalgo, pecresse and a whole bunch of other represntatives.

U might hav som emotionnal connection to that area because of reasons but its those people's right to vent their anger and when's a better time than to do it than before the elections.

Iron maiden once again that group of women is LR, I'm not saying that they shouldn't demand improvements for the area what I'm saying is that the picture they are attempting to paint is flawed!

The reason I loved the area despite the fact that it was filled with drug addicts, drug dealers and prostitutes is how diverse it was! And it still is! The stink being made now is making it look like the area is entirely bad, it's not! They're talking about getting robbed, I got robbed 5 times in my life, only one of which was at Marx Dormoy and guess what that was the only time where I screamed for help and people responded instead of just ignoring me! A group of guys chased down my robber and one of them even held his hands so I could kick him lol! Paris, the entirety of Paris is not a safe haven!

I get harrassed every single day, on the street on the subway and just walking by my home... that's a fact that I have to deal with, and guess what out of all the candidates, Macron was the only one who suggested making it illegal for women to be harrassed! Maybe that's why this petition was made and addressed to him...

But this stink, this article and all the big fuss that's being made about it, are painting the area in a very negative light and making it look like the problem are the refugees... This area was scarred with prostitution, drug dealing and just random group of guys getting high on the streets and harrassing women for quite a long time... And it has actually improved in the last couple of years, it was already improving when I moved out!

To make a long story short, this entire thing is being blown out of proportions and used to score some political points... This is not what life is like at the area. And that is why I think this whole thing was stupid, not the petition rather the unprofessional article and the subsequent media coverage!
 

Iron Maiden

Paragon of Bacon
Orange Room Supporter
Iron maiden once again that group of women is LR, I'm not saying that they shouldn't demand improvements for the area what I'm saying is that the picture they are attempting to paint is flawed!

The reason I loved the area despite the fact that it was filled with drug addicts, drug dealers and prostitutes is how diverse it was! And it still is! The stink being made now is making it look like the area is entirely bad, it's not! They're talking about getting robbed, I got robbed 5 times in my life, only one of which was at Marx Dormoy and guess what that was the only time where I screamed for help and people responded instead of just ignoring me! A group of guys chased down my robber and one of them even held his hands so I could kick him lol! Paris, the entirety of Paris is not a safe haven!

I get harrassed every single day, on the street on the subway and just walking by my home... that's a fact that I have to deal with, and guess what out of all the candidates, Macron was the only one who suggested making it illegal for women to be harrassed! Maybe that's why this petition was made and addressed to him...

But this stink, this article and all the big fuss that's being made about it, are painting the area in a very negative light and making it look like the problem are the refugees... This area was scarred with prostitution, drug dealing and just random group of guys getting high on the streets and harrassing women for quite a long time... And it has actually improved in the last couple of years, it was already improving when I moved out!

To make a long story short, this entire thing is being blown out of proportions and used to score some political points... This is not what life is like at the area. And that is why I think this whole thing was stupid, not the petition rather the unprofessional article and the subsequent media coverage!

I get what you're saying abt the media and yea i think it was adressed to him because he brought it up ta ye7echrou as we say :) but i also do think that u're coming at it with a bit of bias and its understandable i hav a bias towards where i live and hav fun too but my problem eith that is that u're demeaning their problems.
 

Isabella

The queen of "Bazella"
Orange Room Supporter
I get what you're saying abt the media and yea i think it was adressed to him because he brought it up ta ye7echrou as we say :) but i also do think that u're coming at it with a bit of bias and its understandable i hav a bias towards where i live and hav fun too but my problem eith that is that u're demeaning their problems.

No I'm not demeaning their problem, as stated i get harrassed every single day! Literally every day! Even when I look like total crap... I've even punched two men for thinking they had a right to touch me! I do get what these women are facing, but the problem is not limited for the area! And there really is no such thing as women being prohibited from walking down a particular street or sitting in a cafe!

What I am objecting to is the fact that they are painting a very very negative image of the neighbourhood and limiting the problem to Syrian refugees... It's not now and has never been caused by Syrian refugees! What was the big issue in the area in the past were corrupt cops... And that has improved drastically!
 

Iron Maiden

Paragon of Bacon
Orange Room Supporter
No I'm not demeaning their problem, as stated i get harrassed every single day! Literally every day! Even when I look like total crap... I've even punched two men for thinking they had a right to touch me! I do get what these women are facing, but the problem is not limited for the area! And there really is no such thing as women being prohibited from walking down a particular street or sitting in a cafe!

Grow a beard, i never get harrassed :p

What I am objecting to is the fact that they are painting a very very negative image of the neighbourhood and limiting the problem to Syrian refugees... It's not now and has never been caused by Syrian refugees! What was the big issue in the area in the past were corrupt cops... And that has improved drastically!
Fair enough, i know its not the the refugees that are responsible, but usually refugees are dumped into poor areas that are already sufferring from a certain social unbalance and what happens is that they exacerbate that areas problems and get fingers pointed at them.
But to be fair lachapelle is a shithole no matter how u try to paint it.. its just that bad
 

Abou Sandal

Legendary Member
Orange Room Supporter
Que va t-il se passer en France après mai 2017 ?


Documentaire - Le jour où la France est mourue - Comment fonctionne l'Union Européenne?


 
Last edited:
Top