Marianne: when in doubt, go fishing

Odd, don’t you think that Marianne can almost act like it’s head is screwed on straight for once, but couldn’t help the citation: a quote by Karl Marx, a man whose zombie-like followers worship violence, and arrive at some bizarre conclusions.

Although the ‘colonialism’s revenge’ line has been tossed around, even in the English language media, it’s dopey, and the obvious choice of those with agit-prop fever:

« Mutatis mutandis, la France d’aujourd’hui, du moins une frange d’entre elle, fonctionne selon le même système en faisant d’un drame humain, aux conséquences douloureuses, la colonisation, un enjeu de dérisoires luttes intestines en ce début du XX° siècle.

Quarante-cinq ans après la décolonisation et l’accession des anciennes colonies à l’indépendance et au statut d’états souverains, phénomène qui s’effectua pacifiquement au sud du Sahara et de manière plus conflictuelle au Maghreb et en Asie, la question coloniale refait surface. La France de 2 005 est accusée de se comporter comme une puissance coloniale, pratiquant à l’égard de certaines de ses composantes, notamment les populations issues de l’immigration des « trente glorieuses » une politique essentiellement discriminatoire reproduisant l’ancien « Code de l’Indigénat » aboli en 1946 et des les relations entre maîtres et esclaves, dominants et dominés, Blancs et non Blancs.»

”Creating a human drama with the painful consequences, a fringe in France functions according to the same system as it did with colonization, with its’ ridiculous internal fights in this beginning of the 20th century.

45 years after the decolonization and independence of the old colonies, (a phenomenon which was carried out peacefully in the south of the Sahara and in conflict in North Africa and in Asia,) the colonial question resurfaces. France of 2005 is behaving like a colonial power, treating the descendants of immigrants to its’ discriminatory policy like the old "Code of Indigénat" abolished in 1946 and with it the relations between Masters and slaves, dominant and dominated, whites and non-whites.”

They’ve proven one very simple thing: they have race on the mind and fit it into any passing event that they cant explain as if it’s a deus ex machine to wrap up the third act.

No motives for any of this are certain, and they arrive at the conclusions that its’ cause is the history that they take joy in hating. There is a difference between side effects and causes. Even discounting for a difference in political view, I don’t think that they’re right on this one.

They know well enough that the causes of bad events can generally start it’s reversal by first addressing the after-effects of what that harm has done. It’s almost certain that they want big, costly remedial program to address the ill that they assign to events, as well as define the events themselves.

Here’s a tip: look at what’s actually happening first. The socialist-marxist agenda can’t actually solve anything because it was never meant to – it’s meant to perpetuate the conflict that was supposed to lead to Socialist paradise. Happiness and resolution are BAD for the leftist revolutionary cause.

How likely could it be that the colonization that ended 2 generations ago be at the core of all of this? It’s cause is more likely to be present-day helplessness and dependency of the unsuccessful on the state. When the state is the arbiter of your success, and frustrates people who are otherwise trying to make a better life for themselves, there is a backlash.

How could the past 50 years of ‘managed-society’ NOT appear on Marianne’s radar, and the century prior to that figure so greatly? Because to them the cause and effect are the ones that they want to find.

If any of Marianne’s delusions were really true, the descendants of those from EVERY former colony where there was cruelty would join in, but they aren’t, just the state’s economic wards.