112 Gripes About the French • Hacker News Board

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#221

Post by 0des » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:27 PM UTC

gambiting wrote: post #135

eplanit wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People weren't as fragile and sensitive then. It was better in that way.

Except that it's actual nonsense. Not long after WW2 the congress tried to ban comic books for spoiling the youth,just couple decades later people were holding public protests against the Simpsons, and the first TV show to mention the word "period" was met with similar level of protests as if that's something dirty and unspeakable. No, it's the exact opposite - "back then" people were far more fragile and sensitive a…

You are both right, in some ways we have become less bashful about certain aspects of life, but also society today is a bit more particular about some things. It is no longer enough to disagree with someone, you must destroy their will to continue.

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#222

Post by orthoxerox » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:30 PM UTC

dheera wrote: post #200

Jkol wrote: post #152

The opening paragraphs are lovely and absolutely not what I'd expected based on the name. This is the America we want to live in. "We insist upon the right to express our own opinions. But we also believe in the right of others to express their opinions. For the right to speak involves the duty to listen...We know that the truth can only be found through open and honest discussion, and that the common good is served…

xkcd doesn't agree with the "duty to listen". https://xkcd.com/1357/

Randall makes a typical mistake: the constitution bans one specific form of censorship, therefore all other forms of censorship are acceptable.

They are not, they just aren't so unequivocally bad that you can ban them in the constitution with a single sentence.

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#223

Post by dudul » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:30 PM UTC

wyck wrote: post #160

As an outsider who speaks both french and english, and has been to both countries, it always stuck me how similar Americans and French people are. Both sides would rather die than admit they are so similar in terms of spirit an attitude, and this brotherly hate is the main reason they are so similar. It's pretty funny.

Can you expand on that? I have dual citizenship, have spent each half of my life in both countries and I find French and Americans very different. How do you see them as similar?

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#224

Post by long_time_gone » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:30 PM UTC

Intermernet wrote: post #170

analognoise wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We donate more to humanitarian causes than the next 10 countries combined. We openly admit we're not perfect and work to make things better. We do more good than anyone else - by a MASSIVE margin. We openly admit we've made mistakes. Where does this reflexive anti-American bullshit come from?

You know how you just got all defensive and insulted about a generalization made about America? That's how the Chinese, Iranians, Russians, Iraqis etc. feel when you make generalizations about them. The recent US leadership hasn't done a very good job of representing "American Values". You can expect anti-American sentiment from this. It may not be justified when referring to individuals, but neither is the xenophobi…

There is some inherent human nature to viewing your own actions with incredible nuance, while reflexively generalizing the actions of others.

If it happens to me it’s bad luck, if it happens to you it’s bad planning.

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#225

Post by fcantournet » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:35 PM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #32

holografix wrote: post #27

I find this an embarrassingly entertaining read! I particularly like this bit: “The French are not up-to-date. They’re not modern. They’re living in the past." “… The World Almanac for 1945 concludes that as far as social legislation is concerned, "France is in the vanguard" .. The French were certainly up-to-date in establishing old age pensions, compulsory insurance against illness, disability and death, maternity…

Nobody worked 40 hours weeks after the war in France, except maybe civil servants.

That's not the point. It never was the point, it's never been the point of ANY law about ANY duration of the work week. It defines the LEGAL duration of a week's work because that's going to be used for calculating the PAY.

Wehn we went from 39h -> 35h for instance with the same pay, we're just compensating for the massive increases in productivity that occured while salaries stayed flat for 30 years.

And civil servants basically work the same hours per year as workers in the private sector, in France. Always have since 1945. In 2019 it was 1640h vs 1703h effective hours per years, a 3.8% difference.

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#226

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:36 PM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #143

unishark wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Question 81 mentions problems caused by US soldiers. Crimes by foreigners generally cause a lot of outrage, regardless how common they are. I saw stats a few years ago that had the crime rates of US troops in Japan lower than the native population. While the crime rates of immigrants was higher than natives. But one of these topics is politically correct and the other is not.

Not sure you want to call rape (or crime in general) by the local population "politically correct".

[deleted]

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#227

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:38 PM UTC

ThePadawan wrote: post #9

> (...) tensions began to rise between the French and the U.S. military personnel stationed in the country, with the former seeing the latter as arrogant and wanting to flaunt their wealth, and the latter seeing the former as proud and resentful. Well. I mean... Joking aside, the text is amazingly blunt and honest, in a rather refreshing way. "The French don't bathe." The French don't bathe often enough. They can't.…

[deleted]

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#228

Post by snypher » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:38 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #199

overgard wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you are willing to ignore 50% of the population, well, I don't know what to tell you other than that history does not look kindly on partisans.

Not just 50% of the population. Folks on the left will sniffily tell you that stuff where the vast majority of the rest of humanity agrees with the right isn’t even up for discussion.

We shouldn't have the hubris to think the "vast majority of the rest of humanity" agrees with us at all.

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#229

Post by Jkol » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:39 PM UTC

animal_spirits wrote: post #149

> For the right to speak involves the duty to listen. The right to criticize involves the responsibility of giving "the other side" a fair chance to make its point. I wish this could be chiseled in rock somewhere prominent

Can't be that hard or expensive, let's make it happen

Re: 112 Gripes About the French

#230

Post by bumby » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 4:41 PM UTC

yardie wrote: post #168

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll use myself as an example: - Voters should show proof of citizenship when voting. - The US needs to take a serious look at implementing Universal Basic Income, and not just because of the automation of jobs. - Abortion should be legal up to the earliest that a fetus has survived out of the womb, roughly 3 months. - We should celebrate diversity, and, we should be able to talk about what makes us different. Withou…

> - Voters should show proof of citizenship when voting. You'll get no disagreement on this from any liberal. In fact the disagreement lies not in proving citizenship but in the methods to do so. If you have to show proof to register then why do you need to show proof to vote? In fact, if you have ID that proves you are a valid voter then registration shouldn't be necessary at all. Republicans not only want you to sh…

>If you have to show proof to register then why do you need to show proof to vote?

Isn’t the argument that you need to prove the person voting is the same person who registered? Where I live, you only need to give a name and address verbally to vote and that can be gathered online fairly easily.

(Just to be clear, I’m not saying voting fraud is rampant but can understand the risk)