Talk:Socialist Party (France)

Untitled

I'm a French member of the PS (and a member of the french and italian wiki) and i'm not agree with this article, the party isn't a social-democrat party. It's the party the more at left in the European socialist party.

Je pense que vous avez raison. Le PS est un parti socialiste democratique, pas un parti social-democrate. (Pardon my French). Adam 11:07, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't think so. Lionel Jospin's policies have been characterised as progressive, but nothing to do with traditional conception of social democracy or socialism. Naturally, leftist factions do exist inside the party, but the mainstream is definitely 'soc dem'. Some PES members such as British Labour are of course to the right of PSF, but that doesn't change the matter.

And there's no reason to label it as 'left-wing' in addition to 'soc dem', as 'right wing' social democracy is not a very wide-spread doctrine, is it? .Constanz - Talk 12:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Let us omit left-wing from ideology box -- this is not the place to cram everything into. Can socialism (which someone lamentably added) also be right-wing, eh? --Constanz - Talk 15:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm a member of Parti socialiste too and what I found the most shocking is all these right-wing politicians named in the first paragraph of introduction !! From far, you'd better mention that chairs of WTO and IMF are hold by high-rofil members of the PS. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal_Lamy and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Strauss-Kahn !! I believe indeed that a good and simple way to present that party to the international readers would be to list some of its most proeminente personalities. Moreover I don't see the point about making reference to some semi-private ideological doctrines which would not make any sense for most readers and could even create some deep confusion in the real nature of the party. Manuel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.85.107 (talk) 21:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

"Democratic socialism"?

What is all this talk about democratic socialism vs. social democracy??!!! According to what is written (without sources) on Wikipedia about these articles, the Section Française de l'Internationale Ouvrière would have been a "democratic socialist" party, while the actual Socialist Party would have became a "social-democrat" party. This is obvious, and although you may argue, as first anonymous user up there, that it is the "most leftist party in the European socialist party" (?), this doesn't change a fact that the PS has of course completely embraced the liberal democracy in which we live. It's been ages that it doesn't advocate the overthrow of this constitutional regime. Same goes for the French Communist Party, by the way, which is social-democrat since a long time. But why use this expression "democratic socialism" which neither the SFIO, nor the PS, nor the PCF have ever used? The first time I've learnt about it is on Wikipedia, and again, refering to those articles, they are unsourced!. I am therefore removing this allusion. Lapaz 23:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Democratic socialism means that socialism (or some of its features) is intended to be achieved through democracy. Many European parties support this ideology, such as many of the Party of the European Left. I think this article needs some references to those two ideologies and the Third Way to describe the different groups inside the Socialist Party (rather than saying "not left enough", "unauthentic left" or "neoliberal"). NaBUru38 01:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

So democratic socialism is old-school social democracy? To me there were always two things: reformist socialism, i.e socialism, and revolutionary socialism, i.e communism. And then in the 90s all reformist socialist (social-democratic, democratic socialist, whatever you want) parties of Europe moved to social-liberalism in the 'liberal consensus'. Essentially everything from Chavez to Olof Palme to Mitterrand to Bernie Sanders etc. is reformist. This is the classic division I always heard about. Encyclopédisme (talk) 13:22, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

History of French Socialism and English translations

The section on the history of French Socialism prior to the modern Socialist Party needs some editing though I'm reluctant to do it myself because I know so little on the topic. The sentences about French socialism being "beheaded" after the failure of the Paris Commune obviously needs to be reworded. I'm just not exactly clear what happened to French socialism after the Commune and before the next socialist party arose. Also, since France is so important to socialism (with Blanquists, Prodhonists, etc.) it might be a good idea to mention the various socialist strains existing in France prior to the Commune's collapse and the subsequent executions of many of the movement's most significant proponents.

There is an egregious error involving the 2007 elections: the writer has Sarokozy defeating Royale 53 percent to 47 percent. This is not a two party system as in the US. The communists won seats, the centrists won seats...certainly La Pen won some seats... somebody needs to change those numbers--Billyvamp4 (talk) 14:42, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The second round of the presidential election is only between two candiates—the two winners of the first round. The 53 and 47 percent refer to the results of the second round. Mats (talk) 15:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Lack of Details about the Party

As I read this article, the details about the actual beliefs and politics of the party are buried in paragraphs of historical context. For the purposes of informing an English speaking reader of the beliefs of the Parti Socialiste, I propose making a separate section for the party's platform and putting less emphasis on the party's history. The history is important, but should be on par with informing the reader about the party's beliefs and ideology. (Tobey666 (talk) 00:58, 22 March 2012 (UTC))

Remove the history before 1969

The history before 1969 is not relevant of the current Socialist Party. The Socialist Party was formed in 1969 by a merge of left-wing socialist parties. Therefore should the history before 1969 removed?Marxistfounder (talk) 06:57, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

The SFIO is essentially the socialist party. Its leaders were the same, and I don't see a reason to remove that earlier history leading up to 1969. Encyclopédisme (talk) 13:17, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Factions / Courants

In this article as well in its francophone counterpart the section Factions / Courants lists present-day (fr) or recently outdated (here) factions, none of the older ones, rocardiens, CERES etc. although they were quite important in the party's history. --Minorities observer (talk) 19:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Link with the far right

The party's link with far right politicians and politics should be mentioned. If you wish to understand more information read Pierre Péan's book une jeunnese française The basque savior (talk) 19:37, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Additional comments on position

Note that the party has also aligned itself with the NUPES and New Popular Front in recent times, both located on the left-wing. In my edit here, I even fell short of writing just "left-wing", which is what the French Wikipedia says. I believe there to still be a significant centre-left faction in the party so I think "centre-left to left-wing" is appropriate. Paul Vaurie (talk) 23:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)