Talk:Jean-Luc Mélenchon

What categories should he be in

Left of reason	33	Vote
Authoritarian Moonbattery	11	Vote
Insufferable assholes	3	Vote
All of these categories are meaningless	31	Vote

Diacelium (talk) 21:21, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Also, you can explain your vote and debate. Diacelium (talk) 22:11, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Don't know much about the guy, but some of his proposals seem to align with things that a lot of reasonable progressives advocate for. Ɀexcoiler Кingbolt Noooooooo! ^{Look! Up there!} 02:22, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Authoritarian moonbat. All french politics is authoritarian moonbattery. NewFrenchHotness (talk) 11:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

So... What's authoritarian about him ? What makes him a moonbat ? Diacelium (talk) 11:41, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

From the article: He wants to reduce consumption of animal food for ecological, economic and moral reasons. That makes him a first-class prig. - Smerdis of Tlön, ^{LOAD "*", 8, 1.} 15:38, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't see what's wrong about it, honestly. Meat should be a more rare meal. Diacelium (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Despite being quite carnivorous, I do see a merit in the economic and ecological arguments for reduced meat consumption, so I think it's a bit harsh to label someone a prig, let alone a first-class one, for wanting to encourage everyone to eat less meat, though I guess it will depend on the particular arguments used and initiatives suggested for implementing them. ScepticWombat (talk) 15:53, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

What you eat is nobody's business but your own. To moralize over the dietary habits of other people in public is grossly offensive, and not the legitimate business of any government or official. - Smerdis of Tlön, ^{LOAD "*", 8, 1.} 00:07, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Whatever happened to the pursuit of ideas and arguments for their own sake, never mind to pluralism and freedom of speech (even as extended to officials)? Be contrarian, get in people's business. Maybe it will help them grow the skin they so sorely need. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 00:23, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

That in itself doesn't make him an authoritarian prick: the man can think whatever the hell he wants about the moral and ecological implications of meat-eating, that's his own business, and so far the only statements he's made about that are on a purely personal level. For someone who's stated the things you've stated about technology and how mindless, authoritarian regulations of it are the solution to the world's woes, Smerdis, you seem very thin-skinned to me. NewFrenchHotness (talk) 01:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

All state intervention for economy or ecology is authoritarian with this logic. When the state taxes carbon, it's gets in people's business. When it taxes the rich to fund education or healthcare, it gets in people's business. Which means both socialism and social democracy are authoritarian.

The dude who said these categories are meaningless is right, anyway. We can have a dude who thinks sexual attitudes are related to cancer and want to fund alternative medecine in the "Left of Reason" category. Diacelium (talk) 08:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)