Personally, I think we have to remember Sarkozy's promotion of French commercial interests.
Think along the lines of the Putin model. Putin, of course, loves all the turmoil this shit kicks up, because of what it does to the price of oil and gas. And when oil and gas prices are high, Russia wins, and so does Putin.
As for Sarko? The first time there was a severe supply shock, in the 1970's, France took the lead in pioneering alternative energy, in the form of nuclear, and now has a world-beater in nuclear engineering in Areva, which all of us Frenchmen happen to own (its a public company). So, France could also been seen to potentially stand to gain from such unrest. And it's not like Sarko hasn't already shown a certain proclivity in this regard. And it's a fact that Russia already has the Iranian nuke deals sewn up, so it's not like France has anything to gain by siding with the Iranians.
Those that see the cynicism in what I'm saying? I agree. It's contemptible. But that's the way the economic system works. And if you don't like it, change the system, which is more effective than getting indignant about the symptoms of the system... Fai de bèn a Bertrand, te lou rendra en cagant
"They said that if the thing you did was not extremely bad, like putting fire on your school or a car or something like that, that you would have to stay for three months. But if you did something extremely bad- like really putting fire on your school, or attacking your teacher, you would have to stay for a year, without your parents."
"Richard, I said--Richard, you think you're immune- go look at your eyes-- they're full of moon--
My mother was instructed to accept that a cop would come during her lesson, essentially giving up the maths lesson she was to make, to let the cop speak for two hours. She couldn't refuse, so just didn't show up for that lesson... Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
Curiously enough, the places of highest insecurity happen to be places where the working class live, making it harder to obtain that education which is the ticket to equality in this economic system (and likely, alternatives to it as well).
As a parent who will be having children in the same system next year, and as a friend of about half dozen teachers in the system, I'm actually not displeased by this. It's not my first choice in terms of meeting the challenge, but I recognize that it does in fact respond to an actual challenge, and would suggest that unless we start continue to be serious about this, both rhetorically and substantively, we will continue to lose the battle of ideas re: security.
Personally, I think M.-G. Buffet's proposals on this were the most serious and probably the best for children, but it is clear that there was no public will for this approach (look at her score) because it costs money. So, if you want security, and you want it on the cheap (incidentally, I think that's Sarko's unwritten motto) you get what we are getting now.
Not optimal, but imho better than doing nothing at all. Instead of decrying it, we need to present the alternative. Fai de bèn a Bertrand, te lou rendra en cagant
So, if you are going to go the cheap route and instead scare the spit out of impressionable young children, there's no reason the impressionable young children of the bourgeoisie should be exempted.
Plus, I'm sure the establishment is not far from Nos ancêtres les gauloises, a place known for much public disorder due to the all-you-can-drink wine. Is that place even still there? Overpriced crappy food, but the all you can drink wine made it all worth it.
(And we all know the ill effects such disorder can have on impressionable minds....) Fai de bèn a Bertrand, te lou rendra en cagant
