Yet another illustration of how the left and liberals conveniently exploit terrorism and riots to their own advantage. Rather than having any real interest in stopping it, liberals run on a platform of security through appeasement-- warning that the alternative is even greater violence.
“Choosing Nicolas Sarkozy would be a dangerous choice,” socialist Segolene Royal told RTL radio.“It is my responsibility today to alert people to the risk of (his) candidature with regards to the violence and brutality that would be unleashed in the country. Pressed on whether there would be actual violence, Royal said: “I think so, I think so,” referring specifically to France’s volatile suburbs hit by widespread rioting in 2005.
The slogan becomes, "Vote Liberal-- Vote Socialist, or Face the Rioting."
Elections by way of the mob has been an old tactic of the progressive side. Andrew Jackson was after all elected by the mob, that proceeded to trample and trash the White House. In the French Revolution, murderous mobs were capably employed to deal with "Enemies of the Revolution", intimidating anyone who might dare speak out against them.
During the Civil War Riots in New York, touched off by the Democratic Tammany Hall in order to sabotage the War and help elect a Democrat President-- mobs targeted Republicans and Republican editors, before going off to lynch blacks and hang police officers from streetlamps. These riots were not only confined to New York either, but took place in several Northern urban centers that were Democratic party strongholds.
As demographics changed, so did the rioting. In the second half of the 20th century, American Democrats would be more likely to rely on riots by blacks, rather than riots against blacks-- a sea change for a party that had spent a good deal of time in bed with the Klan.
In Europe where well fed burghers can be counted on less and less for a good riot and the generation of the 70's has grown up to hold government posts and places in the Euro-Bureaucracy-- but they've been replaced by a new population of Muslims that is happy enough to not only riot, but spread mayhem and death through terrorism.
In the age of Muslim Terror-- conservatives offer the defensive and offensive use of force-- while liberals preach that the only solution is to meet their grievances. When war efforts falter, the voices of liberals are more likely to be heard preaching appeasement. While the appeasement of course never succeeds-- it isn't meant to.
If conservatives respond to escalating violence with escalating force-- liberals respond with escalating appeasement. Violence is a condition they wish to prolong because it enables them to play 'Good Cop' warning that a failure to elect them will result in even greater violence. That is why liberals also inevitably make deals with groups and individuals that promote violence like CAIR or Al Sharpton-- because they make their position that they can limit violence or increase it more credible.
The essential liberal position holds that society as it is-- is evil and unjust and that violence against it, is directed by those who are oppressed by it. Violence is therefore righteous and it is the victims of violence who are at fault. This is not a condition that can be remedied by anything short of a Communist like transformation of society from one that serves individual ambitions, to a collective society that has rendered all individuality moot in favor of equality enforced by the state.
The ultimate purpose of liberalism is to bring about this transformation into a totalitarian socialist state. Violence is the means for achieving that transformation. To the progressives, violence by the disenfranchised and oppressed is the engine of social change. Only by voting for them-- can the violence be employed to bring about a real social transformation. Whether that violence is the violence of mobs ransacking the city in protest of having to fight a war on behalf of blacks or riots in the ghettoes-- whether it's suicide bombers in the London subway or rock throwers in the West Bank-- the left wing approach is to view that violence as a symptom of injustice which must be given in to in order to create a just society.
This is why they can never be permitted to hold office when facing violence from within. Electing people to public office whose mandate is with the rioters, the terrorists and the mobs is a certain death sentence for a nation and a form of electoral suicide. It's up to the French people to realize that.