Exactly which socialist system that we've seen implemented so far ended the easy affluence for the political elites? For everyone else maybe, but the rulers of socialist countries always seem to be able to do OK for themselves.

quraina - Fantastically funny. I'm still laughing.

I fully agree with VDH. As noted, DSK is innocent until proven guilty. But the real story here is not about whether or not a crime has been committed--it is about the elitism which is deeply entrenched among the European leadership. The grievance does not seem to be that he has been treated unfairly, as much as it seems to be that he has been treated fairly--that is, as any other person accused of a crime would be treated. Do you not know, the French seem to be asking, who he is?

There is considerable fury, not over the U.S. allowing this matter to work its way through the courts, but over the failure of the U.S. to address this in a more discrete way. Are we not able to quietly clean up such dirty little messes without the press stepping their foot in it, as they are able to do in presumably more enlightened Europe?

But all this, as VDH correctly indicates, is simply an indication that the idea that class privilege has disappeared from Europe is simply a charade. It is still very prevalent and very real; but in the interest of maintaining its (undeserved) reputation, too many Europeans go along with the pretense that class has been abolished and done away with and replaced with a more enlightened system.

And re: socialism, it is socialism for thee, but not for me. European leaders have been gaming the system for decades by maintaining residences and lifestyles and incomes outside of their home countries, thus allowing them to push for socialism in their home countries while they continue to enjoy the fruits of capitalism elsewhere. Of course DSK is all for socialism in France--after all, he still has his homes in Washington, D.C. and Morocco, and his income from his work overseas, and his offshore bank accounts who knows where, etc. He can push for socialism in full confidence that it will not seriously impact his lifestyle, and he is far from the only one.

"not to mention modern notions of feminism, about which one would have expected a sophisticated Frenchman to be sensitive"

No, one wouldn't. I'll give the French credit for that, at least.

"All left-wing parties in the highly industrialized countries are at bottom a sham, because they make it their business to fight against something which they do not really wish to destroy. They have internationalist aims, and at the same time they struggle to keep up a standard of life with which those aims are incompatible." - George Orwell

"A book also needs to be written about the psychology that drives elites to push for socialism or statism for others even though it would eventually end the easy affluence that they assume as near birthrights for themselves."

Several books already have been written, of genius caliber. "Cancer Ward" and "Love in the Ruins" spring to mind right away. And their insights are (1) that the "elites" are confident that they can avoid the end of their own easy affluence--actually, more easily perpetuate their easy affluence--by the special talents that bestowed that status to begin with; and (2) that chief among those special talents (though the elites are talented enough to avoid admitting, or perhaps even realizing it) are dishonesty, lack of empathy, and lack of self-criticism.

Dominique is a man of the people. He flies commercial, see?

Socialism in the modern world has ZERO to do with egalitarianism and EVERYthing to do with...POWER. That is why, in an era where the droit-de-signeur of Royalties past is gone, Socialism has become the substitute for that royal power obtained not by merit but by birth.

If you are among the elite, even the Socialist elite (and not even "even" but especially in today's Europe) you are among the ruling classes and thus have the same immunity to charges of ego, elitism, and hypocrisy that a King or Queen or Duke or Dutchess once had.

As for France in particular, it is nothing new--after all, Robespierre and his gang of happy head-choppers were not about removing royalty and its perks but about replacing them with their own buddies, which culminated in the eventual rise of the monster Napoleon who "real" royals had to pursue and put down for their own rivalries' sake.

But think about it--did S-K pay for his suits or suites? Not really. He gained his power from being on the right team, which is, in Europe, the Left team. He's no different than Ward Churchill and Bill Ayers and Keith Olbermann except for having a fancier wardrobe and, it seems as far as we know, a more vigorous way of impressing his power upon the "little people" such as hotel maids who are, of course, mere serfs in his scheme of grandly royalesque things. Lastly, please note that the cries of "conspiracy" from his pals are all about the DISCLOSURE of the event and the TREATMENT of it, and very little about the facts of it. They aren't really outraged that their fellow plutocratic Socialist-royal buddy would rape a maid--they're outraged that those petite-bourgeousie Americans such as judges and prosecutors and cops and beat reporters would dare to object in public about it!

Socialists are the New Royals in Europe. And it is Europe's continuing tragedy that, despite centuries of evidence of the corruption of power and it's negative influence on the lives of every-day citizens, Europeans seem to have a crushing addiction to being "led" by some kind of Royals...usually like sheep to the slaughter either economically like in the current debacle S-K was nominally in charge of or actually in events like World Wars I and II....in both cases fixed by the USA, the nation they now revile for daring to suggest that all men are, indeed, created equal.

>"what confuses Americans the most, superficially at least, is that a man of the Left like socialist Strauss-Kahn should seem so comfortable with the elite tastes of the damnable aristocracy"

Why? Were there still some Americans unaware that the socialists aspire to create an aristocracy with themselves as the aristocrats?

>"The wonder about the French cultural furor over the incident is not that they consider us parochial and “hung up” on s*x, but that the press and its op-ed writers are so blatant in their expressions of class snobbery and national chauvinism."

What's even funnier is that Kahn himself has national chauvinism, but the nation in question is not France! He's on record as saying that the first thing he asks himself when he gets up each morning is "What can I do for Israel today?"