"Emmanuel Macron, the French president, has announced that he is dissolving the national assembly, and calling for legislative elections on June 30 and July 7.

The French president said that he can’t pretend nothing has happened, that the outcome of the EU election is not good for his government and that the rise of nationalists is a danger for France and Europe."

    • MartianSands@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      “dissolving parliament” means they’ve announced a general election. Parliament won’t meet any more, and all the existing members of parliament will go home and begin campaigning

      • mercano@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 months ago

        The UK is going through the same thing. The Prime Minister dissolved Parliament about two weeks ago, and elections are going to be held of July 4th. (An odd choice, but apparently elections are always on a Thursday in the UK.)

    • ZK686@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      43
      ·
      3 months ago

      The Far Right movement is gaining momentum because many of their own people are getting tired of the “immigrants are more important” mindset their country is creating. Many of France’s own people are getting ignored, so that the political parties in charge can focus on helping poor immigrants from other countries. Well, France’s own citizens are getting tired of this, and have started to vote in more people who have a “French People First” mentality (similar to what Trump wanted to do, and everyone called him a racist for being “America First”). So, the party RN (National Rally) wins and now their going to get rid of all the current members in Parliament, and have a new vote to get people in. I think that’s what it means?

      • mumblerfish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        These takes are always so dumb. “It’s immigration”. Then why do these parties also want to get rid of public access television and radio? Why are they trying to limit investigative journalism? Why are they limiting independent research at universities? Why are the against public welfare systems? Social institutions? Juridicial safety? Democratic protections? It’s almost like it is something more…

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          3 months ago

          There’s a difference between what the right-wing voters are wanting and what the right-wing politicians are doing. You run into the same problems with left-wing voters and politicians too. Not to say that they’re “both the same”, just that you can’t treat them all as one big hive mind.

          • mumblerfish@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            There is a difference. But what you are saying is not true, bacause it was tested in Sweden. All parties in parliament, except three parties at like 18% votes in total, said the far-right party have always been correct when it comes to immigration (“always” including when they were an explicit nazi party), and switched to their line. If the voters understood and did not want all that other shit, they should have switched. They did not.

            But there is a difference. The people who run the party today, who joined it when it was an explicit nazi party, probably have a certain goal in their mind where they need all these steps. The voters, in general, are just rationalizing why they vote for the steps.

            • FaceDeer@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              But what you are saying is not true, bacause it was tested in Sweden.

              I’m saying that the voters and the politicians they vote for are not one big hive mind. You’re saying that they are one big hive mind? And your example is that voters didn’t switch their support when their parties changed the positions? I’m not sure you’ve interpreted what I said correctly.

              • mumblerfish@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                What are you talking about? I just agreed that there is a difference between voters and politicians, and then I elaborated on one such difference. In the same comment I also tried to highlight that this still means that it is not the “immigration” question they are voting for.

                • FaceDeer@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Ah. The problem is that you told me “But what you are saying is not true” and then basically agreed with what I’d said.

                  • mumblerfish@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    You may be right. I should probably have said, “what is implied by your reply in the context of the thread is not true” instead, and then perhaps elaborated on the implication some more.

        • eatthecake@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t think the average person gives a toss about any of those things or sees them as adding any value to their lives. They believe that journalists are lying propagandists, universities are elitist and out of touch, welfare serves lazy immigrants and social and democratic systems have failed them. Noone really beleives in society anymore, the right would like to create a new one where they fit in.

      • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        It’s right wing governments pushing immigration to keep wages low, housing costs high, and replacing boomers in the workforce

        Left wingers just want to make life better for their citizens

      • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yup, but people are dumb. We already have an example of what happens with no immigration, it’s Japan. It’s been economical stagnant for thirty years, and has lost even more quality of life than most countries.