Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Conflicted.

On the the one hand, systematically selling out their base is the core problem the left has.

On the other, on the merits reducing the dependance on nuclear is idiocy. The kind of thing only done because people have an entirely unwarranted attachment to compromise and applause lights go off in their heads when they hear the word "diversity".

 The downsides to using nuclear power are nearly entirely the result of using it at all - as long as it is a major contributor, you must have waste treatment, you must have a way to keep the operators honest, ect. None of those issues are reduced even a little bit by going from 80 to 50 % nuclear. All you actually accomplish is a reduction in the benefits - more pollution, higher costs, ect.
So as policy, you should either go all in or not bother at all. What was promised during the electoral campaign is just nonsense. Either use nukes, or do not. going halfway is just bad policy.

...I am going to come back around to the honesty problem. If, as a politician you see a bad policy which would get you votes because the electorate have not thought the matter through, you really should not be making empty promises about it. Either try to convince the people, or at least do not campaign on it.

by Thomas on Sun Jul 7th, 2013 at 04:24:46 AM EST
"Conflicted."?
That depends on how many times he comes down against the interests of his base when the conflict involves monied interests. I don't know the answer to this question. If siding with money is or becomes a regular occurrence then he might be described as 'anguished' but not conflicted. Of what benefit is hand wringing to his base?

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Sun Jul 7th, 2013 at 12:14:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That was not a description of Hollande, that was a description of my reaction. I realize this was not sufficiently clear. My apologies.
by Thomas on Sun Jul 7th, 2013 at 02:49:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thomas:
If, as a politician you see a bad policy which would get you votes because the electorate have not thought the matter through, you really should not be making empty promises about it. Either try to convince the people, or at least do not campaign on it.

Unfortunatley those that do what is necessary to be elected stays in the game, and others sort themselves out. So the sorting process goes against honesty.

I see a referendum institute like the Swiss one as a check on this behaviour. Campainging on what people want to hear gets a politician elected, but to get to enact the policies the politician wants to, convincing the electorate is also necessary. Or at least they can't be convinced of the opposite of what the politician wants to enact.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se

by A swedish kind of death on Sun Jul 7th, 2013 at 02:54:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series