Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
You make a fair point, but the topic of the editorial is not whether the deficit is too high or whether colonisation is properly debated in France, it is whether it is justified to talk only in negatives about France, espcecially when the debate is ideologically driven and inspired by the supposedly superior systems elsewhere. In THAT context, it is highly relevant, and appropriate, to point out that France is not doing worse, or even better, on a number of measures, than the "systems elsewhere", and thus that holding these systems as examples of the reforms that should be done in  France is not necessarily a good idea.

I know exactly what you mean about Chevénement, that's precisely why I don't like him - and why I found the reference slightly unseemly here, as I don't agree with your interpretation of the article.

As far as Austerlitz and colonisation are concerned, I suppose these were used as recent examples of the trends described, with Austerlitz being particularly relevant in view of the Trafalgar parallel, and decolonisation brought in as the reason Austerlitz was sidetracked was because of the slavery issue, somewhat related to colonisation. I did not find these references inappropriate, even if they are certainly not the most significant one can find.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Dec 29th, 2005 at 01:25:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Occasional Series