I recently attended a conference by Louis Chauvel, a french sociologist mainly working on classes in france, along socio-economical lines as well as generation lines.
He made the quite obvious remark that those in power now are those who ingrained the contradiction of Mai 68 into french society, that these people know nothing about the Low Cost Generation that in turns knows nothing of continued growth. His conclusion, then, was that we could really see what was going on right now as the consequence of a generational conflict, in which the clear loosers are the young. They have less purchase power, less capacity to get property [a year of average salary could buy 9m2 in Paris in 1970. Today, it can buy 4; numbers' his].
However, he warns against a sort of new Mai 68 that would simply move the burden away from the young and not actually solve the true problem, being generational conflict.
It is here that he introduces the notion of a renewed social contract in which, to put it simply, the old soixant'huitard would start to understand what was going to on and start caring, and the young would not fall in the same trap as their parents [jeopardizing other people's future]. Basically, he presupposes the solution for the resolving of the problem.
All I try to say, then, is that it is crazy to expect a sort of symetrical discovery of the solution to the problems of the young. It is much realist to hope that the Elite will become a bit more modest and forget their personal upbringings and sense of class belongings, which would enable them to listen more. Thus, i totaly agree with your last paragraph.
Btw, i don't think I have missed a single piece you wrote in the last three months. Rien n'est gratuit en ce bas monde. Tout s'expie, le bien comme le mal, se paie tot ou tard. Le bien c'est beaucoup plus cher, forcement. Celine
He made the quite obvious remark that those in power now are those who ingrained the contradiction of Mai 68 into french society, that these people know nothing about the Low Cost Generation that in turns knows nothing of continued growth. His conclusion, then, was that we could really see what was going on right now as the consequence of a generational conflict, in which the clear loosers are the young. They have less purchase power, less capacity to get property [a year of average salary could buy 9m2 in Paris in 1970. Today, it can buy 4; numbers' his]. However, he warns against a sort of new Mai 68 that would simply move the burden away from the young and not actually solve the true problem, being generational conflict.
Half a lifetime away, as a teenager, I started confronting my parents about the fact that the worldview that they ('68 generation as well, but in Spain) and society generally was trying to pass on to my generation (including expectations about life, career, and so on) was completely in contradiction with what I could already see looming. It's not a generational conflict, it's a reality check. But, as some prominent scientist (or philosopher of science) said once, the way new (presumably better) theories about the world are accepted is that the old scientists die off, not that they change their mind. tens of millions of people stand to see their lives ruined because the bureaucrats at the ECB don't understand introductory economics -- Dean Baker
Louis Chauvel, as you have guessed, it for the CPE under the fallacious pretense that, if it doesn't pass, trying to help the youth will be considered too dangerous by politicians and that therefore the real problems won't be solved until 2016, or in his own words, 'maybe even in 2026'. He basically makes the bet that if the CPE passes, the right will be there to implement the other reforms we desperately need. Rien n'est gratuit en ce bas monde. Tout s'expie, le bien comme le mal, se paie tot ou tard. Le bien c'est beaucoup plus cher, forcement. Celine
