Sacre Bleu.....

And the absurdities just keep rolling off the presses. Maybe James Kalb is right...maybe liberalism just can't help itself, and its growing trivialities (and yet aggressive intrusiveness) ultimately undermine it.

Maybe I am leaping to a false conclusion, but France, as many nations, has a growing Islamic population. Many of those are immigrants whose culture and religion lends itself to the abuse of women. Maybe this is just silly, or maybe this is the state trying to deal with a specific problem in a liberal way.

What if the Swiss, wishing to limit the growth of Islam, had not just banned minarets, but any such spiky structures built for religious purposes? That would have been silly, but more fair and might not have caused such an outcry in places like France.

As I said, I might be leaping to a false conclusion, but perhaps armed with this law police and public officials will still be allowed to act with discretion in the prosecution of domestic abuse cases. Routine French romantic spats will be politiely ignored while real potential abuse cases are hindered from escalating into true domestic violence.

True, Kate, but that brings up a good point. In France, it is now up to a government official (i.e. police, judge) not the individual, to decide when a marital argument has gone “too far.” Being from an Italian family, my definition of “yelling” would be very different from, say, my Scandinavian friends.
And if government officials are not even able to prevent (fundamentalist) Muslims from setting their wives (or daughters) on fire or hitting them with cars, how will this law help.
Like most laws proposed by liberals, this law will limit the freedom of and annoy law abiding citizens, but do nothing to punish real evil doers. (as in current TSA regulations)

I am not saying it is a good law. I am not even saying oh, look at the clever French who have come with the proper answer for the current problem that liberal Western democracies have with how we are going to handle Muslims in our midst when they do those things you mention. I am just observing an aspect of the matter that I have not seen spelled out anywhere. I may be wholly full of beans in my speculation and if you have seen some corroboration for my analysis, please, tell me. Maybe Redwald is right and this is just another modern absurdity. Even if I am correct, I agree with your last sentence with my whole heart and mind.

The majority in the National Assembly is held by a federation of parties descended from Charles de Gaulle's organization; the Prime Minister of France is a 55 year old married man who is a member of this caucus. The whole political spectrum is mad.

It seems to me that there was in French public discourse eleven years ago a mixture of jeering at and reproof of those of us across the pond as B. Clinton's extramarital sodomy habit was a matter of public controversy. Private lives of public figures, Americans need to 'grow up' and all that. Did this happen, or has my addled mind projected on the French commentariat the inanities of their American counterparts?

With all due respect, Kate, if they want to outlaw real spousal abuse (which I'm sure they already had), they need to pass a law that says "stop beating your wife/husband." This "psychological abuse" nonsense has more to do with a radical feminist agenda than anything else-- a way of "liberating" women from that despicable, medieval institution known as marriage. Indeed, "verbal abuse" has become an increasingly common "grounds" for divorce in this country. The fact is, any excuse will do if you want to shatter a marriage/family.

I would encourage all to read James Kalb's "The Tyranny of Liberalism." He goes too far in some respects, but I suspect he's correct in one thing..."liberalism" has morphed into soft totalitarianism throughout much of the West. And of course that won't work any better in the West than it did in Eastern Europe, China or SE Asia.

"SOFT" totalitarianism??? Tell that to the IRS, or the EPA, or all those fans of Eminent domain. (need I go on?)

Redwald, what respect do you think I am due?

Maybe you are right, but I do not see what stake the French government has in shattering marriage/family.

I cannot help but use the word "liberal" to mean something to do with liberty and an inclination to liberty. I know the connotation the word has taken on for most of the world, especially conservative Americans, and think it a pity and the abuse of a good word.

I think you are due the respect anyone should have, but even more because you are a very sensible and thoughtful person.

"Liberalism" has taken on the legacy of Rousseau...radical transformation of society to yield equality...it no longer represents the sentiments of Smith, Locke, and Hume. Kalb is saying that liberalism and radicalism are just stages of the same political disease, although I don't think I agree with him on that. It is sufficient to say that modern liberalism is essentially creeping radicalism.

Sorry about the loss of the word, Kate. "Gay" was a great word as well, but....

Thank you. That was kind.

Yes, I do not really understand the liberty the modren liberal is trying to promoteThe idea that a larger government will set us more free does not make sense to me. "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

While I agree that this is a threat to freedom, Islam as understood by several of its sects could make all of that moot if Muslims gain political ascendency in any Western nation. .