Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by on Sunday May 07 2017, @10:42PM   Printer-friendly
from the le-roi-est-mort dept.

Emmanuel Macron has been declared the President of France after early vote counts:

France has a new president. Emmanuel Macron – an independent centrist who has never held elected office – has won a resounding victory over far-right, nationalist Marine Le Pen in the most important French presidential race in decades, according to early vote counts by the French Interior Ministry.

In early returns, Macron had won an estimated 65 percent of the vote to Le Pen's nearly 35 percent, according to the French Interior Ministry. Le Pen has already called to congratulate Macron and conceded defeat to a gathering of her supporters in Paris.

Also at The Guardian (live), Washington Post, NYT, Reuters, and The Local.

From CNBC: Euro hits six-month high on Macron victory

CNN editorial: Why Macron's victory is reassuring ... and yet not

BBC has an article about Macron's potential choice of Prime Minister.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) 2
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday May 07 2017, @10:54PM (57 children)

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday May 07 2017, @10:54PM (#506036) Homepage

    Well, you can't win 'em all. Bye Bye, Europa, it was nice knowing you. Let's hope the Slavs and the Baltics stay strong in their fight against the Islamic menace and their handlers in Brussels.

    (How the fuck does somebody who says that France should get used to terror attacks get elected?)

    • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:17PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:17PM (#506046)

      Was Macron's crowds bigger than Trump's?

      • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by Fluffeh on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:28PM

        by Fluffeh (954) Subscriber Badge on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:28PM (#506054) Journal

        A primary school roll-call is probably bigger. And their hands are comparable as well too from what I hear...

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @02:51AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @02:51AM (#506151)

        Whatever the audiences were at rallies for the candidates, more than a third of eligible voters in France didn't bother to vote. [google.com]
        This was up from 28 percent last time.
        Democracy has gotten a really lousy name--at least what passes for Democracy these days.

        -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by mendax on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:47PM (46 children)

      by mendax (2840) on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:47PM (#506063)

      And you think that neo-fascist Marine Le Pen would somehow make things all right? France has terrorism problems because, among other reasons, France has problems assimilating its Muslim citizens. Being made to feel like an outsider all the time would hardly make a person feel welcome. The United States, in contrast, and despite that asshole Donald Trump's best efforts, does a better job of it.

      --
      It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
      • (Score: 0, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Monday May 08 2017, @12:05AM (28 children)

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Monday May 08 2017, @12:05AM (#506068) Homepage

        " Being made to feel like an outsider all the time would hardly make a person feel welcome. "

        Oh, things will improve once they get to roll out their independent parallel law system and all women without head-coverings are beaten in the streets. And the no-go zones. Feel bad for urban tourist industries, though -- why would anybody fly all the way out to Paris to live Planet of the Apes? If I wanted to see the streets and sidewalks of my finest city covered with tents, filth, and criminals; then I can simply go a few miles down to East Village and with the added bonus that the vagrants there at least know how to speak my language, won't cut my head off, and I'm a few steps away from a good baseball game.

        • (Score: 5, Informative) by julian on Monday May 08 2017, @12:39AM (24 children)

          by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @12:39AM (#506086)

          And the no-go zones.

          Do you mean the mythical ones [bloomberg.com] that only exist in the minds of bigoted, terrified, ignoramuses who can be tricked into parroting any fake story if it fits their xenophobia? The world has enough real horror in it to worry about, you don't need to make shit up.

          I think you've been reading too much of The Camp of the Saints [wikipedia.org] and are confusing it with reality.

          Thankfully, the french react with amusement to this hoax,

          "That's pretty funny," says Hait Abbas, a non-practicing Muslim who runs a wine shop in a Paris neighborhood among those identified by Peterson as a no-go zone. Far from being Muslim-dominated, the neighborhood near the Gare du Nord train station bustles with Italian delis, African hair-braiding shops, and Chinese massage parlors. If it's governed by Islamic law, Abbas says, "I guess I better cut my hand off."

          Emphasis mine. Hit him up if you're ever in Paris, I'm sure he can set you straight about more than a few topics on which you are perennially confused.

          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:32AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:32AM (#506109)

            The no-go zones are places where the law enforcement will be attacked at all times and crimes go largely unsolved because no one has seen anything.. This enables criminal gangs and drug trade. Ambulance personnel gets stones thrown at them. And normal people may be physically intimidated. Some areas even have their form of patrolling Sharia thugs. This doesn't happen to everyone, everytime. But it has become a regular occurrence that were not there before. The phenomena exist regardless of what people believe.

            Anecdotes will not negate statistical trends. Nor will mainstream media propaganda.

          • (Score: 5, Disagree) by Grishnakh on Monday May 08 2017, @03:16AM (17 children)

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday May 08 2017, @03:16AM (#506157)

            "That's pretty funny," says Hait Abbas, a non-practicing Muslim who runs a wine shop in a Paris neighborhood among those identified by Peterson as a no-go zone.

            I have to point out that this is impossible. There's no such thing as a "non-practicing Muslim"; that's like a "non-practicing Catholic". Either you are or you aren't. It's not like being Jewish. If you aren't practicing the religion, then you aren't part of the religion any more. I was raised Catholic. I don't practice any more (since college), and guess what? I'm not Catholic now, I'm agnostic. It's even moreso for Muslims, because the word itself means "submission" (to Allah). If you aren't practicing, then you obviously aren't submitting to some deity, so the word doesn't describe you. Just because Islam came from the Middle East alongside Judaism doesn't mean it works the same way; with Jews, you can be "ethnically Jewish" but not part of the religion. Not with Islam, and not with Christianity either, or really any other religion on the planet.

            This Hait guy isn't a Muslim. He should be identified by his nationality (e.g. "Moroccan"), or by his ancestry (e.g. "Moroccan-French"), as those are things that will correctly describe him. If he isn't actively participating in and following a religion, then using a religious label for him (other than "agnostic" or "atheist") is simply incorrect.

            • (Score: 2) by julian on Monday May 08 2017, @03:46AM (5 children)

              by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @03:46AM (#506165)

              He can identify with the Islamic culture he comes from without believing the supernatural aspects, and if he wants to still call himself a Muslim that's up to him. It's not clear if this particular man describes himself that way, or if the author of the piece did, but people who do identify that way exist.

              In comparison, I'm an atheist, but I celebrate Christmas and Easter. I have identifications with the Christian religion because the Christian religion informed the development of Western culture generally. One difference with Islam is that their current cultures are more closely tied to their religion; similar to how Christianity was more central to daily life in Europe hundreds of years ago.

              There is even a body of philosophical thought called Christian atheism [wikipedia.org].

              • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Monday May 08 2017, @04:48AM (4 children)

                by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday May 08 2017, @04:48AM (#506182)

                In comparison, I'm an atheist, but I celebrate Christmas and Easter.

                So what? Lots of people celebrate Halloween by wearing slutty outfits but that doesn't make them religious. Christmas and Easter aren't religious either: Christmas was originally called Saturnalia, and is one of many winter-solstice festivals that pretty much every culture has. The gift-giving came from the Roman Saturnalia, and the fir tree came from Germanic pagan traditions. The Christians merely stole the holiday and renamed it. Easter has nothing to do with Christianity: its the name of a goddess of fertility, and the rabbit symbolism comes from that since rabbits are infamous for being fertile. Again, the Christians stole the holiday and appropriated it to get people to convert, except here they couldn't even be bothered to come up with a new name. I celebrate Christmas too because I think pagan holidays are fun (hence the decorated tree) and I think the Roman tradition of gift-giving is nice; I sure as hell don't tie it to Christianity in any way.

                because the Christian religion informed the development of Western culture generally.

                Bullshit. The Greeks and Romans created Western culture. Next time you go to court for something, notice that all the names for everything are in Latin: the mechanics of our legal system come directly from Roman jurisprudence, and the foundations of philosophy and medicine come from ancient Greece. When the Christians took over, Rome soon fell and we had the Dark Ages and 1000 years of backwards feudalism instead of civilization.

                similar to how Christianity was more central to daily life in Europe hundreds of years ago.

                Like when they burned people at the stake for heresy?

                There is even a body of philosophical thought called Christian atheism.

                That just strikes me as people clinging to churches because of tradition and wanting to be part of some community, and trying to rationalize their position. If you want to create a philosophy club, great, but being a regular member of a church which has particular beliefs they profess and evangelize, and refusing to accept these, seems insincere to me. If you don't agree with them, you should leave and form your own group, rather than being a fraud.

                • (Score: 3, Interesting) by julian on Monday May 08 2017, @05:50AM

                  by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @05:50AM (#506202)

                  Nowhere did I imply that the history of Western culture began with Christianity. Obviously Greek and Roman influences predated it--and I agree that Christianity was not an improvement, especially for science and philosophy.

                  The rest of that seems to be you getting angry at how some people choose to use language and define their terms. I'm perfectly happy with Christian atheism as an idea, it seems perfectly coherent to me even if I don't agree with it (Jesus was not a great moral teacher). And likewise I don't see any paradox in considering oneself to be a cultural or non-practicing Christian/Muslim/Hindu/etc. These phrases accurately track people's experiences and conceptions of themselves so I find them useful.

                • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 08 2017, @12:06PM (2 children)

                  by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday May 08 2017, @12:06PM (#506302) Journal

                  I celebrate Christmas too because I think pagan holidays are fun (hence the decorated tree) and I think the Roman tradition of gift-giving is nice; I sure as hell don't tie it to Christianity in any way.

                  That's good for you. It's your perspective. I'm not sure why you're so angry that someone else has a different one. I'm well-aware of the origins of Christmas, but most people don't know that much about it. Yet a LOT of people "celebrate" it some way even if they aren't really a "practicing" Christian in any other sense. They may or may not claim to be "Christian" overall, but they think of the holiday as Christian. What you have here is a version of the "etymological fallacy": just because Christmas may have relationships to various pagan festivals in its origins doesn't make it ONLY a pagan festival.

                  There is even a body of philosophical thought called Christian atheism.

                  That just strikes me as people clinging to churches because of tradition and wanting to be part of some community, and trying to rationalize their position. If you want to create a philosophy club, great, but being a regular member of a church which has particular beliefs they profess and evangelize, and refusing to accept these, seems insincere to me. If you don't agree with them, you should leave and form your own group, rather than being a fraud.

                  I'm shocked anyone modded this "informative" when by the end you clearly have either gone into pure "rant" mode or are just trolling.

                  The reality of the world is that almost every Christian denomination has "particular beliefs they profess," often in a detailed catechism or official set of doctrine somewhere. And yet, in most denominations, it's likely that a very large portion (perhaps most for Catholics) "practicing" members of that denomination don't believe in ALL of them. I mean, ask your average Catholic on the street -- do they REALLY believe that the bread IS the "body of Christ" during the Eucharist? I mean do you absolutely believe that it's transformed that way? And a lot will hedge a bit and spout some stuff that isn't really Catholic doctrine, but a lot will also just say they never understood that, and they view it more as a "memorial" to Last Supper tradition.

                  By your definition, these people "should leave" and form their own group, since they are "frauds." The Eucharistic doctrine is essential to Catholic belief, but how many Catholics REALLY believe it? And let's not even get into polls of Catholics on church doctrine on controversial political issues like contraceptives or abortion. This is a "No true Scotsman" fallacy. Or perhaps No true Irishman [irishtimes.com], for among Irish Catholics (according to that article), 8% don't believe in God, 15% don't believe Jesus is the Son of God, 18% don't believe God created man, and a full two-thirds say that transubstantiation doesn't occur and the mass is more of a symbolic remembrance. Even among regular mass goers, only half believe in this core tenet of transubstantiation. (To be fair, these sorts of polls depend on the place -- in Latin America, belief in transubstantiation is still quite strong, but not in the traditional Catholic bastion of Ireland.)

                  What your definition ends up with is saying that there's like 5 guys in Minnesota somewhere who are "actually" Lutherans (or whatever), because they really believe EVERYTHING their church says literally, without question. And Catholics and Lutherans, etc. are actual denominations with statements of faith and such that all must subscribe to. The "bar" is a lot lower for just claiming to be a "Christian." Who adjudicates that, exactly?

                  If somebody wants to call themselves a "Christian atheist," why should I have a problem with it? In fact, since you say you're agnostic and have left your church, I would think you should actually be in favor of such a thing, because it's actually HONEST ("I don't believe in God, but I still want to follow some moral tenets of Christianity" or whatever) rather than the loads of "practicing Christians" who actually don't believe what their faith claims.

                  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday May 08 2017, @04:46PM

                    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @04:46PM (#506424) Journal

                    If you think that """every Christian denomination has "particular beliefs they profess," """, please explain modern Unitarianism. Or, it has been reported, Anglicanism. I can't find the quote I'm looking for but to paraphrase it "a religion so inoffensive that it interferes neither with a man's beliefs nor with his actions". (That certainly hasn't been the case at all times for either of them. Unitarianism used to be rather stricter than average, and Anglicanism used to have rigidly prescribed rituals, at least for the clergy.

                    --
                    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @01:54AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @01:54AM (#506706)

                    I'm not sure why you're so angry that someone else has a different one. I'm well-aware of the origins of Christmas, but most people don't know that much about it.

                    Begun, this Soylent War on Christmas has!

            • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:57AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:57AM (#506223)

              "non-practicing Muslim" has a specific meaning - it means someone who doesn't practice Salah 5 times a day [wikipedia.org]. It means nothing else. Most Muslims are non-practicing because it is very difficult thing to observe. It is very much against Sharia.

              Not getting involved in any debate - just putting some definitions out there to help. Hence posting AC.

              Also, know from this, that lack of knowledge cannot be compensated by engaging in debate. Putting theory above practice got us into dark ages...

            • (Score: 3, Informative) by arslan on Monday May 08 2017, @07:32AM (1 child)

              by arslan (3462) on Monday May 08 2017, @07:32AM (#506230)

              I have to point out that this is impossible. There's no such thing as a "non-practicing Muslim"; that's like a "non-practicing Catholic". Either you are or you aren't. It's not like being Jewish. If you aren't practicing the religion, then you aren't part of the religion any more.

              I don't think that is accurate, please provide a citation. I grew up in a predominantly Muslim country but officially a secular country (non-Islamic state officially) and there are "non-practicing Muslims". In general they do what most non-pious folks would do, avoid going to the mosque regularly, don't or minimally observe Ramadan (although they try to do it inconspicuously as much as possible for obvious reasons) and some I've observed even eat pork. Given it is not officially an Islamic state (though there are Syariah courts for muslims but not over non-muslims) the policing is pretty laxed especially in the major metropolition cities where population is too large for the syariah folks to police and the mosques to keep attendance tally. Lots gamble and have pre-marital coitus as well.

              In small villages, yea no way one can get away with it but in the big cities with large urban sprawl and overpopulation anything goes. There's a least a couple of countries in South east asia that are like this.

              So unless, your comment is specifically about France, which I can't really comment on, your claim surely is not accurate as a generalization.

              • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday May 08 2017, @02:55PM

                by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday May 08 2017, @02:55PM (#506371)

                It sounds to me like all those "non-practicing Muslims" you speak of only claim to be Muslims because of social pressure, not because they actually believe it. If you're going to break all the laws (eat pork, have pre-marital coitus, not attend Mosque), then what's the point of claiming you're an adherent of the religion? Simple: social pressure. You don't want to anger your parents, or it'll negatively affect your job or housing, or you'll lose your friends, etc. So that means that you're really a fraud. If you don't believe in a religion, then don't claim to be an adherent. Of course, if that's going to seriously affect your quality of life (or even quantity), then it does make good sense to falsely claim to be a follower, but at least acknowledge to yourself that you're really a fraud, and hopefully work towards changing your society so that that social pressure is gone and people have the freedom to be non-adherents if they choose.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:37PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:37PM (#506339)

              Actually, it might interest you to learn that it is no longer possible to leave the Catholic church. At least formally [wikipedia.org].

              You can of course claim to not be catholic, but you could still be listed as being one in various countries and church records.

              Though I agree somewhat with your sentiment and it may often not make sense to name such people by their link to a religion they hardly care about, I think the world is not black and white. Many people feel somewhat attached to their original religion, without following it to the letter (or in fact, much at all). This is a well recognized phenomenon [wikipedia.org], at least for Catholics. But I see no real reason why it could not be applied to other religions.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @02:17PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @02:17PM (#506355)

              I love it when a genuinely insightful comment is modded troll. Going for the +5 Troll rating.

            • (Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday May 08 2017, @03:12PM (4 children)

              by Thexalon (636) on Monday May 08 2017, @03:12PM (#506379)

              There's no such thing as a "non-practicing Muslim"; that's like a "non-practicing Catholic". Either you are or you aren't.

              On the contrary, both of those exist. I've worked with people and befriended people that would be accurately described as non-practicing Muslims and non-practicing Catholics. And they aren't all that different from each other:

              - A "non-practicing" or "lapsed" Catholic is somebody who went through all the Catholic stuff growing up: Baptism, First Communion, Confirmation. It wouldn't be surprising if they had a Catholic wedding too, and when the time comes they might have a Catholic priest in to handle Last Rites and the funeral. But they don't go to church regularly, don't do confession, use birth control, and if you ask them about it they'll say something like "It was important to my grandfather that I do all this, but I don't really believe it."

              - A "non-practicing Muslim" is much the same way: They've said the bit about "There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet" at some point. They do the prayers or visit a mosque when they're around somebody else who cares about doing them, and will know how to do the prayers properly. But they aren't going on a hajj anytime soon, they aren't waking up at 5 AM for morning prayers, don't typically go to the mosque on Fridays, will have a beer after work, and may eat lunch during Ramadan. If you ask them their religious affiliation, they'll say "Muslim", but will pretty freely admit that they don't follow all the rules and it's not all that important to them.

              --
              The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
              • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday May 08 2017, @03:59PM (2 children)

                by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday May 08 2017, @03:59PM (#506404)

                Yep, both those people are frauds. They're lying to others and to themselves about what they really are. If it was important to your long-dead grandfather that you be part of some religion, but you don't care about it yourself, then why would you bother? I'm sure if I could resurrect my grandfather and ask him if it's OK for me to be in an interracial relationship, he'd say NO, but why would I hold myself to the opinion of a racist like that? If I go back farther, I'll surely have direct descendants who think slavery is great, but I sure as hell don't want to maintain or promote that horrible tradition either, just because some ancestors thought it was a great thing.

                • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday May 08 2017, @06:04PM (1 child)

                  by Thexalon (636) on Monday May 08 2017, @06:04PM (#506473)

                  They're substantially different from someone who doesn't identify at all with those religions, though.

                  If I'm sitting through a Catholic service, I only vaguely know what's going on, and can't fully participate in it because I've never done the things required to take Communion. Whereas my non-practicing Catholic friends can and do know exactly what's going on and can fully participate if they so choose, and certainly are familiar with the culture and in-jokes and such.

                  Religious belief and behavior is analog, not digital, and trying to treat it as a binary is not a worthwhile activity. There are always varying degrees of strictness in every faith tradition, and regardless of the official rules written down somewhere, in practice nobody expects strict religiosity from most of the people who say they're in a particular faith tradition.

                  --
                  The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
                  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday May 08 2017, @06:36PM

                    by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday May 08 2017, @06:36PM (#506488)

                    Whereas my non-practicing Catholic friends can and do know exactly what's going on and can fully participate if they so choose, and certainly are familiar with the culture and in-jokes and such.

                    Yes, I'm the same way, because I was raised Catholic. If you insist on calling me a "non-practicing Catholic", however, I'm going to be extremely offended and probably rudely insult you to your face. I've explicitly rejected that religion and just because I happen to know all the rites doesn't mean I want be forever stuck with that label. Anyone who chooses to read about it can learn all the same things, probably even better than me since they have more interest in knowing it now, unlike me who only knows it from childhood.

                    Religious belief and behavior is analog, not digital, and trying to treat it as a binary is not a worthwhile activity.

                    It *is* binary: either you believe or you don't believe. If you think it's bullshit, then you're not a believer, and it's wrong to conflate you with the other believers of that faith. Moreover, it gives undue power to that group, because it allows them to unfairly inflate their numbers with people who aren't actually members and don't participate. It's no different than allowing Microsoft to count most Linux users as "Windows users" just because their PC happened to have Windows pre-installed when they bought it, even though they wiped the HD and installed an OS of their choosing afterwards.

                    in practice nobody expects strict religiosity from most of the people who say they're in a particular faith tradition.

                    Oh please. There's a big difference between expecting an adherent to strictly live by every rule, and know all the ins and outs of a religion, and actually believing in the fundamental tenets of that religion. It's entirely normal for adherents to not know all the minutiae; that's the job of their clergy. But it is entirely reasonable to expect them all to actually believe in the fundamental dogma that is central to that religion (i.e., that Jesus is a deity if you're a Christian, that there's an actual God if you're a believer in any Abrahamic religion, etc.). It's also entirely reasonable to expect them to continue to participate to some extent, even if it's not extremely regular. Someone who hasn't been involved in a church in any way in decades cannot be rightfully considered a member of some organized religion; that's just lunacy. It is possible to observe a faith on your own without being part of a particular organization (I've known Christians who've decided they hate going to church because of all the other people there), but that's different because people like that still believe in the fundamental dogmas, even if they don't participate locally with others. Participating without believing even the most fundamental dogmas means you're just a fraud, taking advantage of it for social purposes, perhaps to use it as a social club, or because it helps you get brownie points in your community or something (like politicians who go to a church regularly so they can look like "upstanding community members" even though they don't believe any of it and act completely contrary to the teachings).

              • (Score: 1) by purple_cobra on Tuesday May 09 2017, @02:07PM

                by purple_cobra (1435) on Tuesday May 09 2017, @02:07PM (#506910)

                There's always lapsed Catholics [youtube.com].

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:55PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:55PM (#506465)

              Someday language might evolve to be exactly what you want. Until then, the rest of us will read and understand his meaning, but feel free to remain willfully confused.

              -A non-practicing Catholic

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:10AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:10AM (#506206)

            If they're so 'mythical' would you mind going on a stroll as an openly gay man? You may just find yourself 'enriched'.

          • (Score: 1, Troll) by VLM on Monday May 08 2017, @12:15PM (3 children)

            by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @12:15PM (#506307)

            bustles with Italian delis, African hair-braiding shops, and Chinese massage parlors ..... Hit him up if you're ever in Paris

            Why would I ever want to go to Paris if its basically downtown USA? Its not like there's any French people in Paris anymore. I'd like to experience Parisian/French culture, but all I'm gonna get if I go to France is Italian food, African barbershops, Chinese bordellos and endless Muslim terror attacks.

            I'm not sure ethnic food is worth stacks of filled body bags. Every time I'd buy a kebob from a street vendor in the USA I get to wonder about the tradeoff of food poisoning, but in France I'd get to wonder about the tradeoff of dead little kids knifed or crushed under trucks (and probably food poisoning too).

            Multiculturalism = worship of destruction

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @12:58PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @12:58PM (#506326)

              And every time you masturbate God kills a kitten.

            • (Score: 3, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday May 08 2017, @04:19PM (1 child)

              by Thexalon (636) on Monday May 08 2017, @04:19PM (#506415)

              endless Muslim terror attacks

              Since 2000, a total of 247 people, or less than 20 people a year, have been killed by terrorists in France. That's considerably fewer than have been killed in the US by terrorists in the same period, even factoring in the population difference.

              And of course you'd experience French and Parisian culture in Paris. Major European cities aren't all that different from New York: There's a distinctive local culture, but also subcultures from all corners of the world. For example, in Germany, beer and brats is easy to find, even though you can also enjoy sushi or Turkish falafel if you'd like.

              --
              The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
              • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @08:54PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @08:54PM (#506573)

                Terrorism is NOT normal. Japan has none.

                Japan has about two dozen refugees. Japan has roughly a thousand muslims, and the government monitors them all. Japan stopped bringing people in after a few rapes; the safety of Japan takes priority over being nice to non-Japanese.

                The kids are safe. They walk alone for miles at preschool age. Aside from photos and minor touching, the women are safe. (no real harm)

                Meanwhile, in the multi-cultural world, we are not safe. It's not just big terrorist productions; regular immigrant crime matters too.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:48AM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:48AM (#506116)

          I've asked this before but you never seem interested in responding. What is WRONG with you?

          For all the tough guy talk you act like a scared little kid.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @02:34AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @02:34AM (#506139)

            Malformed brain. [google.com]
            (It's true of the entire Reactionary genre.)

            -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @03:18AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @03:18AM (#506158)

          Just like Dearborn, MI! OMGFREAKOUT! The Moooooooooooooslims are coming! The Moooooooooooooooslims are coming!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:43AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:43AM (#506179)

        Being American, totally disagree with you. There really is no such thing as "assimilation". You cannot assimilate foreign people without changing the country in fundamental ways, damaging it. Blacks have been in the USA a long time and I guess have been "assimilated", are, or were, christian, and so on but still the fundamental differences are striking, in habits and behaviour. Forget assimilation, muslims have their own countries, many of them, and thats where they should stay,

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @09:06AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @09:06AM (#506257)

          You are no American! You are some trash that some other country did not want and ended up here! So double fuck you, unless you can tell us what tribe you are a legitimate member of, and don't say Cherokee! And if you cannot, get your ass back on a fricking boat to what every country you came from that raped you with Catholic priests, because American is NOT a Christian nation! We kill christians here, we make them take oaths on bibles, thus condemning their souls to hell! We have them imbibe the sacred herb, tobacco, so their god will reject them by their smell! We make them lie with a man as with a woman, or a sheep, or a Moon pie! So again their god will smite them, right in the cahones. And you are afraid of Muslims? You cowardly immigrant!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:20AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:20AM (#506196)

        I used to believe the same thing but once you start looking at actual data on Muslim beliefs [pewforum.org] it's just not really supported by data.

        I think one of the main reasons that Islam has been so 'successful' in terms of maintaining such a large of fundamental or core worshipers (as opposed to the vast majority of e.g. christians just engaging in Pascal's wager [wikipedia.org]) is because the religion itself is designed to not merge or mesh. Islam is designed to be incredibly visible. Men need to pray 5 times a day which is done aloud and while prostrating oneself. Women also need to pray 5 times a day, but women like in most things in Islam are segregated and treated in an inferior and childlike fashion so that's not so visible. Instead they're given something even more visible - that need to cover themselves head to toe in a fabric and requirement that they do the best job they can of making themselves look like Cousin It [imgur.com] instead of a woman.

        The problem with this sort of required behavior is not so much the behavior itself but the fact that it works as the ultimate virtue signaling. In Christianity if you want to stop worshiping, it's a purely personal belief. Most Christians already don't attend church and so all that's left is your beliefs in your head. One minute you're a believer, the next you're not. So far as anybody looking at you is concerned absolutely nothing has changed. In Islam choosing to not believe is something that would be immediately outwardly evident. This is made even worse by the fact that many in Islam still hold apostasy to be a grievous crime with many still believing it's even worthy of death. More secular Muslims might be okay with just completely exiling the nonbeliever from their society.

        This makes it already extremely difficult for a Muslim individual to segue out of fundamentalism or 'core worship.' And like any sort of fundamentalism it also trends towards increasing radicalism. I've seen some on these boards mention Indonesia as an example of a moderate Islamic country. It's like they don't know that as recently as as the sixties, during the US sexual revolution, Indonesia was busy murdering [wikipedia.org] hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of alleged "communist sympathizers, ethnic Chinese and leftists." Various areas throughout the country are now also beginning to require all women wear the burqa and is also a hotbed for terrorism recruiting. Given their current trajectory, in a couple of decades Indonesia is going to look a lot like Saudi Arabia.

        Muslims are still killing other Muslims over a succession debate that we're coming up on the 1400 year anniversary of. When they still think murdering each other over a disagreement 1400 years old is something okay to do, it should be clear that there's something far more severe going on here than just them 'not feeling welcome.' I think this sort of naivete is the cause of so many horror stories such as when a world peace activist, Pippa Bacca [wikipedia.org], decided to hitchhike through the Mideast wearing a wedding dress symbolic of cultures and individuals coming together. She, sadly, did not make it out of the first Islamic country on her tour - Turkey. Another country that was generally considered somewhat moderate.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:12AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:12AM (#506207)

        Ooooh, so it's the fault of the French that they're being murdered.

        "Well, she shouldn't have been wearing that; she was asking for it!"

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @09:22AM (9 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @09:22AM (#506260)

        I think your theorem "let's assimilate muslims, so ISIS will leave us alone" needs a bit of proof. Blanket statements regarding a leftist view of immigration are routinely being disproved by facts. Isolated facts, most of the time, sure, but you need just one counter example to sink a theorem.

        Of course, you being wrong does not imply the other side being right either.

        • (Score: 2) by TheRaven on Monday May 08 2017, @10:17AM (8 children)

          by TheRaven (270) on Monday May 08 2017, @10:17AM (#506274) Journal
          Most of the current crop of terrorists are not mythical ISIS invaders coming over the border, they're locals who have been radicalised. They're no different from the nationalist or Christian terrorist movements: people feel disenfranchised and are a target for people who want to use them. The way to tackle this is to avoid having a large proportion of your population feeling disenfranchised.
          --
          sudo mod me up
          • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday May 08 2017, @12:17PM (7 children)

            by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @12:17PM (#506308)

            They're no different from the nationalist or Christian terrorist movements

            There seems to be a slight difference in body count, like hundreds per year in France vs "it happened once last decade to single digits in the USA"

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:51PM (2 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:51PM (#506345)

              FYI, estimates of casualties as a consequence of e.g. the IRA, are amounting to 2000 during ca. 30 years. ETA was responsible to about 900 over a somewhat longer period (since 1960 i think).

              Then, wikipedia lists 400 deaths in France due to terror since the 1970, and not all of those where because of ISIS or similar groups.

              So far, it seems what you say is BS, though if they keep it up they may outdo their Christian competitors.

              • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday May 08 2017, @08:35PM (1 child)

                by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @08:35PM (#506553)

                The IRA had nothing to do with religion, it just happens that the English have been trying to genocide the Irish race for a couple centuries, with some success here and there, and virtually all the English are prots or atheists and virtually all the Irish are catholics or atheists.

                Its like claiming green beer causes terrorism because those darn IRA, LOL.

                Actually a nearly perfect analogy would be to claim the sole cause of the American Civil War was the northerners were mostly prots or progs and the southerners tend baptist, so clearly the american civil war only happened because of religion.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @10:15PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @10:15PM (#506625)

                  >The IRA had nothing to do with religion,

                  About as much as ISIS has to do with it.

                  Also, you missed the point.

            • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:35PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:35PM (#506423)

              I also fail to see where the scripture orders to terrorize people.

              • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday May 08 2017, @08:39PM

                by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @08:39PM (#506556)

                Ahem, old testament, ahem. Of course there's a lot of old testament that most Christians are not terribly interested in.

                Also its a classic old book vs modern interpretation. Uncle Adolf was portrayed as a nice guy in Mein Kampf, a nice devout Catholic Vegetarian semi-pacifist after getting gassed in WWI, a real nice guy. Well that's an old book, whereas the modern portrayal in progressive media is not quite as complimentary toward dear uncle Adolf. So some old book said something, whatevs...

            • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday May 08 2017, @07:01PM (1 child)

              by Thexalon (636) on Monday May 08 2017, @07:01PM (#506500)

              They're no different from the nationalist or Christian terrorist movements

              "it happened once last decade to single digits in the USA"

              Which of these incidents are you referring to?
              * 2 killed, 6 wounded at a UU Church in Knoxville TN, in 2009, by a Christian activist opposed to the UU's support of gay marriage
              * 1 person, George Tiller, killed at his church in Wichita, KS, in 2009, by a Christian group opposed to abortion
              * 1 officer shot and killed at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington DC, in 2009, by a white supremacist Christian
              * 6 people killed, 4 wounded at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, WI in 2012, by a white supremacist Christian who apparently thought he was attacking Muslims rather than Sikhs
              * 3 people killed in Las Vegas, NV, in 2014 by a couple that apparently saw their efforts as continuing the work of Cliven Bundy
              * 3 people killed in a shooting at Planned Parenthood in 2015, by a Christian activist opposed to abortion

              And of course it's worth noting that by far the largest and most influential terrorist group in the history of the United States has been the KKK, which is thoroughly Christian in its ideology. The line between what is Christian terrorism, what is white-supremacist terrorism, and what is neo-Nazi terrorism is often blurry because of that history.

              --
              The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
              • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday May 08 2017, @08:31PM

                by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @08:31PM (#506549)

                So about a tenth of an French Islamic truck driver per year in a country (USA) with five times the population and about 2356246112 times the handguns.

                Yeah France has a problem.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:27AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:27AM (#506290)

        neo-fascist Marine Le Pen

        I thought she was a nationalist and much more of a centrist than her father, how exactly is she a fascist?

      • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Monday May 08 2017, @02:27PM

        by linkdude64 (5482) on Monday May 08 2017, @02:27PM (#506362)

        You're right, I never fit in school/with other kids, was bookish/shy, etc. so I beheaded and raped a few people along the way. So what? Typical stuff everyone goes through, you know? All cultures are pretty much the same.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:54PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:54PM (#506497)

        So you say they are being terrorists because we fear that they are terrorists?

        Look, if somebody is such a touchy powderkeg that society's refusal to accept them is cause for terrorism, THEN THEY ARE TERRORISTS. We don't fucking care why. We shouldn't feel required to appease these people.

        And yes, they are a problem, even when they don't get all explody. You can kiss LGBT rights goodbye. You can kiss women's rights goodbye. You can kiss freedom of religion goodbye. This is the future of France.

        20 to 30 years from now, there will be massive genocide in Europe. The only thing in question is the winner, which might vary from place to place. There will be neighbor-on-neighbor violence, Rwanda-style. There will be mass migrations. Think "partition of India", "creation of Israel", "Armenian genocide", etc.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:02AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:02AM (#506095)

      This is his full quote from the Guardian: “This threat, this imponderable problem, is part of our daily lives for the years to come. I would like to express all my support for our police forces and more generally the forces of law and order. I am particularly thinking of the victim’s family.”

      Reading comprehension. Do you know what it is?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:22AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:22AM (#506107)

        That is words not action. We'll see what he actually WILL DO.

    • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by jmorris on Monday May 08 2017, @02:03AM (2 children)

      by jmorris (4844) on Monday May 08 2017, @02:03AM (#506125)

      Steady on, hold the line and all that stuff. Can't think of a proper car analogy but a Star Wars one is apt. BrExit and Trump was A New Hope and Belgium and France says we are now in The Empire Strikes Back, but we know eventually we make it to Return of the Jedi and win. This moron can't possibly make things any better for France and is in fact almost certain to make it a lot worse. If their ideas worked they would have worked -somewhere- by now. They don't, so just hold the line and be patient. There just wasn't enough pain yet for France to be willing to take a chance.

      • (Score: 2) by julian on Monday May 08 2017, @04:31AM (1 child)

        by julian (6003) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @04:31AM (#506174)
        • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:58AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:58AM (#506186)

          It is maddening knowing there are hordes of Russian propagandists flooding websites with ideologies, because when is someone an actual reactionary nationalist and when are they just a shill trying to please their master?

          I guess its tomatoes and potatoes all the way down...

          Given the occasional bouts of lucidity from the likes of Jmo, the disowned Puerto Rican 3rd cousin of Jennifer Lopez (sorry Puerto Rico), I tend to think it must be a propagandist trying to stir up some shit and derail conversations. It would actually be much more sad if the person is a legit US citizen.

    • (Score: 2, Funny) by idiot_king on Monday May 08 2017, @04:51AM

      by idiot_king (6587) on Monday May 08 2017, @04:51AM (#506183)

      Oh no! The Nazis lost again!

      Maybe they should try a different angle? You know, one not tied to White Nationalism? You might win some battles for once.

      Just a suggestion.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:53PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:53PM (#506464)

      Yeah, it's almost like he didn't actually say that at all and was willfully misquoted. Weird, maybe you should look into that.

  • (Score: 2) by archfeld on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:45PM (42 children)

    by archfeld (4650) <treboreel@live.com> on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:45PM (#506062) Journal

    As someone not familiar with the political landscape of France, can someone who is break this down into simpler terms...What does it mean in the real world, and in general how does that effect the EU ?

    --
    For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
    • (Score: 5, Informative) by mendax on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:50PM (4 children)

      by mendax (2840) on Sunday May 07 2017, @11:50PM (#506064)

      Well, for one thing, there won't be a "Frexit" any time soon, something that would be a disaster worse than the one the British are getting themselves into soon. Second, it means that the Euro is here to stay, at least for the foreseeable future. But more importantly, it means that the alliance between the French and the Germans, one that was advocated by Winston Churchill after the end of the Second World War, will remain very strong, thereby ensuring the peace of western Europe.

      --
      It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
      • (Score: 2) by archfeld on Monday May 08 2017, @01:41AM

        by archfeld (4650) <treboreel@live.com> on Monday May 08 2017, @01:41AM (#506110) Journal

        Thank-you....

        --
        For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
      • (Score: 1) by Linatux on Monday May 08 2017, @02:39AM

        by Linatux (4602) on Monday May 08 2017, @02:39AM (#506144)

        the alliance between the French and the Germans just means they will suffer the same - peace is far from guaranteed

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:07AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:07AM (#506169)

        They were close friends during the war. [wikipedia.org] Not allies but close.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @07:05PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @07:05PM (#506506)

        Remember, long ago World War I used to be called "the war to end all wars" or "the Great War" and nothing like that would happen ever again. Let's not be fools about this. War is coming. It is inevitable. Numerous civilizations have collapsed; the people who inherit great civilizations are seldom able to sustain them for many generations due to sloth, greed, acceptance of cultural invasion, acceptance of cultural change, and an unwillingness to brutally fight.

        When most of the children born are from 3rd-world Muslim immigrants, which is soon to be the case, you're seeing the extinction of a civilization. There is going to be a fight. We're only 20 to 30 years away from genocide. Probably the Muslims will win, but nobody can be sure. Whatever happens, it will be bloody, and France will not be able to retain the trappings of a modern nation. Perhaps a non-Muslim country will rise from the ashes of France within a century. Perhaps not. The rest of the world could be facing an ISIS-like country with nukes.

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by driverless on Monday May 08 2017, @01:56AM

      by driverless (4770) on Monday May 08 2017, @01:56AM (#506123)

      Le Pen = French Trump, or a Trompette. Macaroon = not Trump. Any questions?

      PS: Thank you, French voters, from the rest of the world.

    • (Score: 3, Touché) by linuxrocks123 on Monday May 08 2017, @03:33AM (35 children)

      by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Monday May 08 2017, @03:33AM (#506162) Journal

      We've already had several or our most regular insightful commentators -- Ethanol-Fueled, jmorris, etc. -- post summaries of the event and its implications. I urge you to read their comments.

      The only thing you have to be careful of is these individuals are posting from another dimension, a mirror universe / Bizarro world / opposite universe from ours. Computers and technology appear to basically be the same in this universe, but everything political is switched. So, for instance, when they say that Western civilization is doomed because of this election, it means Western civilization was saved.

      Remember this for their posts on other articles, too, or you'll miss their insights.

      • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Monday May 08 2017, @03:53AM (15 children)

        by NewNic (6420) on Monday May 08 2017, @03:53AM (#506167) Journal

        We've already had several or our most regular insightful commentators -- Ethanol-Fueled, jmorris, etc. -- post summaries of the event and its implications. I urge you to read their comments.

        This site is dying. The constant flamebait and pure hate that spews from the keyboards of drunk uncle (Ethanol-fueled) and others is driving away rational discussion and with it readers.

        I don't understand why The Mighty Buzzard works on the site: surely he gets all his reading material from Breitbart. What does he need from SoylentNews?

        The rate of posting stories is frequently glacial, with stories frequently posted several days to a week after they first appeared.

        This site was created in response to changes at Slashdot, but it has become worse than Slashdot.

        --
        lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:15AM (10 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:15AM (#506195)

          Yup. The 2016 election year was a massive turning point for this site, and with Trump winning it has only gotten worse.

          I've started reading slashdot again, and while it feels a little sterilized and the ads are annoying it still seems to have a better level of discussion. The only real intellectual discussions I tend to see here are the weird discussions that use lots of Latin and references to obscure philosophy. It is like we only get the extreme ends of the spectrum here...

          I'm not sure what can be done. Possibly remove the ability to post as AC? I stopped logging in just because I don't care enough anymore to bother, half the discussions seem to be pointless trolling and the rest are like arguing with stubborn children. SoylentNews is to Slashdot as Voat is to Reddit. It has attracted the unseemly elements that are tired of being drowned out by the majority of people who see their views as distasteful, and while I really like the community focus and free-speech ethos it is no longer enough. The barely contained animosity and hypocrisy is just too much, to the point where I am just letting loose on every idiotic post I see. I've lost my own desire to remain civil and strive for decent discourse, that attitude has only resulted in hours of wasted time responding to changing goal posts, straw men, and worse.

          Get rid of ACs and allow people to completely hide another user's posts. Give users the freedom to interact with the discussion on their own terms, similar to reality where you could just walk away from someone you dislike and continue a conversation with your friends. I think there would quickly be an uptick in decent discussions and a dropoff in mod wars.

          • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:02AM (7 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @06:02AM (#506205)

            For a contrary view, I think it's absolutely critical that people of different views come into contact. You know how many people change their views in an echo chamber? Zero. All it mostly leads to is radicalism.

            When the masses are entirely together extreme views one way or the other tend to get squashed. But as people split off into their little echo chambers further divergent radicalism towards that path starts to seem more and more okay. This is a big part of the reason why half the country thought there was no way Trump could win. Places like Reddit don't have minority views "drowned out by the majority" but instead rely on extensive censorship and blocking to present one view as a clear majority, when that's simply not in tune with reality. As an aside if you'd like to see a Reddit thread without censorship and blocking change 'reddit' to 'ceddit' in any URL. It's interesting how many completely innocuous comments get deleted and removed by moderators and bots. Calling the censorship of discussion a slippery slope would be an understatement. The connotation of a slippery slope suggests something might end in something worse. Censorship seems to always lead to that something.

            I think it's important both sides are able to see the other side. It's the only way views every change. And if somebody is so far gone into extremism that they're probably not going to be able to communicated with like a human then treat them like a troll. And the number one rule there is don't feed the troll.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @08:48AM (4 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @08:48AM (#506252)

              I'm all for alternate viewpoints, but the worst offenders of trolling / discussion distraction do not listen to reason or facts. It is just denial and misdirection in every single response. When a large fraction of the vocal users here only engage to troll / soapbox it ruins the atmosphere and drives users away. Nothing interesting, just more political flame wars. The offenders are die hard nationalists with large hints of bigotry, and whether you like it or not those are not conducive attitudes for intelligent discussion. After years of seeing these views all it has shown me is that they are incapable of changing their views, and the only thing I've benefited from is the realization that they are actually the special little snowflakes who want their opinions to be validated. The nationalist xenophobic mindset is consistently on the wrong side of history, and I see no reason to give it credence now.

              I did not advocate for censorship, but the ability for any user to hide the posts of any other user. 1/100 posts from Ethanol Fueled is worth a damn, and rarely is it actually insightful. The same goes for a handful of other users, in all I would probably only block 3-6 users, and of course there should always be a button for "show hidden posts". It is already baked into the moderation system, it should be trivial to add such a capability. "Don't feed the trolls" is a good motto, but it is not always obvious when someone is trolling and in such cases there will always be someone who pushes back against a shitpost. Asking thousands of people to just ignore a shitty opinion and let it hang around like a turd is a fantasy.

              As it stands everyone has a soap box, and moderation does very little especially after the system was crippled. Get rid of AC and have every post start at zero, or watch the site decline further. Bonus for adding the ability to block users.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:45AM (3 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:45AM (#506295)

                I'm all for alternate viewpoints, but the worst offenders of trolling / discussion distraction do not listen to reason or facts. It is just denial and misdirection in every single response.

                This is a public forum where other people read the comments. I have no problem reading comments or engaging in arguments with people that I disagree with. We discuss, we pick up information and we learn. So much more enlightening than taking propaganda or constructed narratives at face value.

                Get rid of AC

                Said the AC? Being able to discuss things anonymously leads to some terrific discussions because people are not afraid of social repercussions for stating exactly what they think. There's little trolling here compared to the glory days of the green site and I suspect most remember some of that nonsense fondly.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:36PM (2 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @01:36PM (#506338)

                  I had a long reply and just realized I'm tired of this. There is no convincing the neanderthals here of anything, and there is little point in trying. There are enough users to correct the horrific dribblings of the neo-cons and radical libertarians. I'll leave the trolls and cavemen to their fun and wish the rest of you the best of luck.

                  I'm done trying Mr. Troll, good luck with your system of contracts! Maybe you can beg Musk for a ride to the nearest planetoid to try it out.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @07:43PM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @07:43PM (#506528)

                    There are enough users to correct the horrific dribblings of the neo-cons and radical libertarians.

                    I'm not a conservative or a libertarian.

                    I'm done trying Mr. Troll, good luck with your system of contracts! Maybe you can beg Musk for a ride to the nearest planetoid to try it out.

                    <sarcasm>"horrific dribblings"?</sarcasm>

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:08PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:08PM (#506653)

                      It wasn't aimed at you and yes it was reactionary crap aimed at the site's real trolls

            • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 08 2017, @01:36PM

              by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday May 08 2017, @01:36PM (#506337) Journal

              For a contrary view, I think it's absolutely critical that people of different views come into contact. You know how many people change their views in an echo chamber? Zero. All it mostly leads to is radicalism.

              While I completely agree with you there, it can also get frustrating when you start to doubt the sincerity of many posters. I'm not going to call out users here by name (I'm sure we all know them), but a number of frequent posters here seem to vacillate between reason/engagement/insightfulness and obvious taunting or even insincere trolling. Frequently it even happens in the same post, which makes moderation difficult. It also makes it difficult to judge where to "don't feed the troll" because it's not always straight "troll-like" behavior for a number of them.

              Dialogue between disagreeing factions is great. Arguing with people who may or may not be serious at any given point can be tiresome.

            • (Score: 2) by fritsd on Monday May 08 2017, @05:05PM

              by fritsd (4586) on Monday May 08 2017, @05:05PM (#506431) Journal

              The expression "both sides" is still a little bit Cartesian, though.. ;-)

              I like what Macron said when he got elected (whether he meant it or not, we shall find out):

              (I first found the English translation on BBC News here [bbc.com]; I'll try to find the original)

              I'm aware of the divisions in our nation which have led some people to extreme votes.

              I respect them.

              I think I hit the original here [europe1.fr] (contains video; 1 minute 8 seconds in he says it)

              "Je les respecte" Bloody hell he actually said that!

              Even more "extreme" :-) 02:43 "Je defendrai l'Europe" :-)

          • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @10:00AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @10:00AM (#506272)

            The only real intellectual discussions I tend to see here are the weird discussions that use lots of Latin and references to obscure philosophy. It is like we only get the extreme ends of the spectrum here...

            Tu mea anonymous ignave perierunt, nec habent ideam quod sint de! Nonne Latinam in schola studere non habent? Quare non est quod sentire illuminationum barbari possederunt occurrit? Et omnem culpam rant Google Translate. Nescio si quid per eam currere.

          • (Score: 3, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 08 2017, @01:27PM

            by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday May 08 2017, @01:27PM (#506333) Journal

            The only real intellectual discussions I tend to see here are the weird discussions that use lots of Latin and references to obscure philosophy.

            I assume you're referencing this recent discussion [soylentnews.org]. I haven't seen a lot of Latin here or even that much obscure philosophy, though it sometimes happens. And before I engaged with the whole Boethius thing, I actually posted a longer thing on the physics. I agree that there's not always a lot of "intellectual discussion" on a lot of topics, but they do happen. To me, it feels like there's a higher proportion of interesting individual posts, rather than extended intellectual "discussions."

            I've started reading slashdot again, and while it feels a little sterilized and the ads are annoying it still seems to have a better level of discussion.

            I have to disagree. As someone who never completely "left Slashdot" (you'll still see my occasional post there, though I'm modded up much less frequently), I find the discussion there has been infected by the same 2016 mania as here. It was actually partly my frustration with that which drove me here mid-2016 (where I had previously mostly been an occasional lurker and reader). To me, it seems the bar now is higher to get an "anti-groupthink" post noticed over at Slashdot. I've always been a bit of a contrarian, someone interested in nuance over blanket ideology. But mostly I find I'm just ignored there anymore. Posts that get modded up there are either expressing groupthink or yelling at each other. I'm generalizing, and there are lots of exceptions, but that's how I feel.

            Also, the level of editing (which was never great at Slashdot) has gotten significantly worse in the past year or so, I think. I feel like there's a LARGE proportion of clickbait and stories just designed to get people yelling at each other. It used to be a joke there about feminist stories posted on Friday to get people worked up -- now, it seems they seek out such stories daily to keep people commenting and riled up. That, combined with the giant ads, makes it really annoying.

            Anyhow, I'm not saying there aren't things that could be better about this site. And it's hard to maintain community. But I find Slashdot increasingly irritating, so I don't check in there very often anymore.

        • (Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Monday May 08 2017, @06:34AM (2 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @06:34AM (#506216) Journal
          One thing I want to point out here is that on SN we have a killfile [wikipedia.org] of sorts. Put the miscreant in your "foe" list and set your options so that posts from your foes are modded very negative. Then browse at 0 or higher. You still have the replies (maybe we should have a negative mod for posts that reply to foes too? :-) These users aren't invisible, but they are much less intrusive.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @01:59AM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09 2017, @01:59AM (#506709)

            Yeah, but i killfilled khallow multiple times, but he just keeps coming back to life. Someone said I need to use garlic.

        • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 08 2017, @01:49PM

          by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday May 08 2017, @01:49PM (#506343) Journal

          The rate of posting stories is frequently glacial, with stories frequently posted several days to a week after they first appeared.

          This is a criticism I agree with, though the delay is generally more like 2 or 3 days I think in most cases. Nevertheless, I think it's problem for many users. A lot of "news" really is pretty ephemeral; wait 2 days and nobody cares anymore. For things like new scientific discoveries or whatever, it doesn't much matter if the post comes a couple days later. But for "current events" stories that make a big splash in the media, I kind of wish the editors here would bump things to the front of the queue more frequently. The main opposing argument I've heard here is that waiting a couple days often benefits discussion, because more "facts" are often in than with breaking news. But I think that really only applies to a minority of stories. Waiting maybe up to 24 hours is okay (since the major media outlets will sometimes uncover new stuff), but 3 days after some event happened, you've lost a lot of the interest.

          I often wonder if many occasional users or people who have tried using this site end up just going elsewhere when they actually want to discuss current events on the day they happen, which ultimately leads them away.

          This site was created in response to changes at Slashdot, but it has become worse than Slashdot.

          Have you been to Slashdot lately? I said more in another post below, but Slashdot has also become worse than Slashdot used to be (even in the past year or two).

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:13AM (18 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @04:13AM (#506170)

        There's a pending story submission [soylentnews.org] about Marie Le Pen winning the presidential election in France.

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by NewNic on Monday May 08 2017, @05:34AM (17 children)

          by NewNic (6420) on Monday May 08 2017, @05:34AM (#506198) Journal

          There's a pending story submission [soylentnews.org] about Marie Le Pen winning the presidential election in France.

          There is another story [soylentnews.org]that has been pending for 3 weeks, which shows what a lie the need for voter ID is.

          Anything that is vaguely political but doesn't support the alt-right agenda doesn't attract the interest of the admins here. It's amazing that this story was posted.

          --
          lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 08 2017, @06:45AM (13 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @06:45AM (#506220) Journal

            Anything that is vaguely political but doesn't support the alt-right agenda doesn't attract the interest of the admins here. It's amazing that this story was posted.

            You can change that by submitting your own stories. That alone will probably change the "alt-right agenda" since we'll be getting more and presumably better input.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @09:12AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @09:12AM (#506259)

              Just stop it, khallow. You're killing SoylentNews.

            • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Monday May 08 2017, @03:06PM (11 children)

              by NewNic (6420) on Monday May 08 2017, @03:06PM (#506376) Journal

              You can change that by submitting your own stories.

              The length of the current submissions list suggests that posting more stories won't make a difference to that issue.

              --
              lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 08 2017, @11:08PM (10 children)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @11:08PM (#506654) Journal
                9 in the queue currently.
                • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Tuesday May 09 2017, @05:32AM (9 children)

                  by NewNic (6420) on Tuesday May 09 2017, @05:32AM (#506764) Journal

                  I don't think you can count. When I looked earlier today, a short time after your post, there were 20 in the queue.

                  In any case, look at the queue: it supports my proposal that there is a right-wing bias to accepted stories. Is the fact that two dogs were saved more important to a tech-centered site than issues of privacy, the influence of billionaires in elections, net neutrality, windows flaws?

                  This site is dying because it's pushing a biased political viewpoint and allowing hate and racism to be posted without consequences for the posters.

                  --
                  lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 09 2017, @09:03AM

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 09 2017, @09:03AM (#506798) Journal

                    I don't think you can count. When I looked earlier today, a short time after your post, there were 20 in the queue.

                    That's a part of my point. The number of stories go up and down rather quickly. The circumstances change and what was the situation when this story was posted probably was not the same as when you posted.

                    Is the fact that two dogs were saved more important to a tech-centered site than issues of privacy, the influence of billionaires in elections, net neutrality, windows flaws?

                    Apparently not, since that didn't make it out of the queue. Meanwhile I did see at the time, front page stories on the firing of EPA science advisors, people not trusting companies when it comes to research, California police unions opposing the banning of license plate readers, and consumer profiling for exploitation. Stuff you just might be interested in.

                    There's a simple name for this process, confirmation bias. You're more likely to remember the stories that are obnoxious or run counter to your beliefs, than the stuff that doesn't.

                  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 09 2017, @02:15PM (7 children)

                    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 09 2017, @02:15PM (#506915) Journal
                    I stand corrected. The dog one has made it to front page. I still don't see the right wing bias to that.

                    This site is dying because it's pushing a biased political viewpoint and allowing hate and racism to be posted without consequences for the posters.

                    Hmmm, reading over your post again, what sort of consequences would you suggest? And how do you keep that mechanism from backfiring on you, say by an administrator abusing their power?

                    • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Tuesday May 09 2017, @05:13PM (6 children)

                      by NewNic (6420) on Tuesday May 09 2017, @05:13PM (#506984) Journal

                      And how do you keep that mechanism from backfiring on you, say by an administrator abusing their power?

                      Well, since I discovered that there is an unwritten rule of "Don't down-mod The Mighty Buzzard excessively", I don't really know the answer to that.

                      I was told via email that the rule is "don't down-mod the same poster 5 times in a day", but since the rule isn't written in the guidelines and the person whom I down-modded and the person who banned me from moderating for a month are one and the same, it's not an unreasonable assumption to believe that the real rule "don't down mod The Mighty Buzzard excessively.

                      --
                      lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
                      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 09 2017, @09:40PM (5 children)

                        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday May 09 2017, @09:40PM (#507136) Journal
                        Ok, so you modbombed TMB and got slightly punished in exchange. So where's the abuse? Have you been modbombing other SN posters and only got caught when you modbombed TMB?
                        • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Tuesday May 09 2017, @10:34PM (4 children)

                          by NewNic (6420) on Tuesday May 09 2017, @10:34PM (#507164) Journal

                          It's possible that I modbombed others without consequence. Let's face it, Drunk Uncle (AKA "Ethanol-fueled") deserves a lot of downmods for his rants.

                          But my point remains: the rule "don't modbomb someone 5 times in a day" is not written in the moderation guidelines. When the person you modbomb is the same person who revokes moderation privileges and uses a "rule" that isn't actually documented, then it looks like the administrators are not acting impartially.

                          It looks like the rule was made up on the spot because I modbombed an administrator.

                          --
                          lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
                          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday May 10 2017, @06:59AM (1 child)

                            You should have been mod-banned the first time you did it to someone else but we're looking at making it not possible via code instead of having to dish out mod-bans for it, so I tried to warn you via Admin->User messaging, which you apparently had turned off and never received. The second time I did not handle it because I make a point of absolutely never making decisions like that where I'm in any way involved.

                            You're right that it needs to go into the moderator guidelines bit of the FAQ if it's going to stick around but like I said, we're looking at nuking them programmatically instead of trying to fight human nature and causing hurt feelings. I'll talk to one of the other guys tomorrow and see about lifting it this time and calling it a belated warning. But, and this is just a suggestion, you might want to turn Admin->User messaging on in your Messages Preferences. There's nothing automated ever going to be in them, it's strictly for when a human being wants to contact you about something site-related.

                            --
                            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                            • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:14AM

                              by NewNic (6420) on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:14AM (#507952) Journal

                              I turned on the Admin->User messaging as you suggest.

                              --
                              lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
                          • (Score: 2) by martyb on Wednesday May 10 2017, @04:08PM (1 child)

                            by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday May 10 2017, @04:08PM (#507604) Journal

                            I've reviewed the moderations, and agree there had been no clear statement about mod bombing in the Moderation FAQ [soylentnews.org].

                            In light of this, I have:

                            1. Revoked the moderation ban
                            2. Updated the moderation FAQ

                            Further, there had already been discussion about how we can preclude a mod ban from ever occurring.

                            One thought was to put up some kind of message when we detected that a given moderation would be the 5th down mod by user 'A' against user 'B'. It sounded great, but there is an issue with that. A user could select moderations on multiple comments on a single story, and then click 'Moderate' — in that case, we receive all of those moderations in one batch which precludes putting up a warning.

                            We are leaning, instead, towards taking a similar approach to what happens when you attempt to downmod a comment that is already at the lower bound (or upmod a comment that is already at the upper bound). This can happen quite by accident. I load a story and see a comment modded '+4 Funny'. I think it is hilarious! I click the moderation box and set it for 'Funny' and am ready to click 'Moderate'. Unbeknownst to me, and at the same time, someone else has done the exact same thing, and has already clicked 'Moderate'. So, the comment is really at '+5 Funny' at this point. When I now click on the 'Moderate' button, the system detects that this would create a '+6 Funny', and basically ignores the moderation. (A comment's moderation is limited to -1 to +5, inclusive.)

                            The thinking is that when we detect a moderation that would have invoked a mod ban, we instead just drop the moderation on the floor and ignore it.

                            Lastly, though I can understand how it may seem otherwise, this had nothing to do with the user which was down modded. It is a credit to our team that whenever a discussion arises about a mod ban, if it affects one of the staff, they have universally stepped back from taking any unilateral action — in this respect, they are treated no different than any other user on this site.

                            I would also like to take a moment to mention that mod bans are exceedingly rare on this site. We have one heck of a community here and I feel privileged to be in a position where I can provide support to help ensure these discussions can continue.

                            --
                            Wit is intellect, dancing.
                            • (Score: 2) by NewNic on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:12AM

                              by NewNic (6420) on Thursday May 11 2017, @06:12AM (#507950) Journal

                              Marty,

                              thanks for the reasoned explanation.

                              --
                              lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
          • (Score: 1, Redundant) by VLM on Monday May 08 2017, @12:07PM (1 child)

            by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 08 2017, @12:07PM (#506304)

            Progressivism in politics is dead, its just anti-white propaganda now. Its just not interesting anymore.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:59PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @05:59PM (#506469)

              Thank you for the perfect example of why SN is a failing site.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:17PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 08 2017, @11:17PM (#506658)

            And you'll notice that the divisive stories that do get posted are almost always by TMB with commentary very obviously baiting a flame war. Maybe a 6 month ban from admin powers would be good for him and everyone else. I've submitted stories that are much higher quality than some around here but they never saw the light of day.

            Only libertarian circle jerking allowed!

(1) 2