Well, why was France silent about Strauss-Kahn's womanizing? And, if it comes to that, why is there a curious elision between seduction and violent assault that is close to rape. One explanation might be this:
Strauss-Kahn may have been abetted by the fact that most of his so-called conquests involved ideological fellow travelers — as was reflected by the Banon case. Says the French lawyer who asked not to be named: "My clients and other women I've been contacted by with reports of sexual aggression by Strauss-Kahn were all either Socialist Party members, supporters, or involved in wider leftist political activity that eventually brought them into contact with Strauss-Kahn. He has said he loves women, but it seems more accurate to say he loves Socialist women. I suppose he viewed that milieu as providing his supply of new women, and as one where women who caught his eye would either be compliant, or keep quiet about having to fight off his advances. Either way, there are a lot more women — and men — in Socialists circles who know about his activity than have ever said so."This is an old story - the Left, who are supposedly feminist and supportive of women's rights, will silence women (sometimes with the women's full agreement) when a left-wing male is threatened. Bill Clinton is the most obvious example; his victims were abused racially and sexually by his left-wing supporters, which included feminist organizations. But, on a more disgusting level, think of Gerry Healy and the WRP, which numbered various Redgraves among its members.
The case in New York City reflects another dimension of the problem in France. "If I try transposing the situation in New York on Sunday to France, I just can't do it," says Diallo [Rokhaya Diallo, president of Les Indivisibles, an association that promotes diversity in France] "Not only because the woman is black and apparently an immigrant. But also because she's a housekeeper. Perhaps even more than her race, her station in society would probably prevent authorities [in France] from taking her accusations against a rich and powerful man seriously. Racism is on the rise here again, but class discrimination has never gone away."Then again, the class aspect did crop up with Clinton as well with at least one of the women who complained described as "trailer trash" by somewhat unexpected people.
UPDATE: DSK has resigned from his job at the IMF, which shows that, having worked in the private sector, he understands reality a bit more than his enarque colleagues. Traditionally that job, as opposed to the one at the top of the World Bank, goes to a European. Ed Morrissey at Hot Air who seems to confuse Europe with the European Union is a little sniffy about that.
The issue for the EU is whether it can reclaim the top spot at IMF. For the moment, American John Lipsky is in charge, but the IMF won’t keep an American in that slot; the US gets the top spot at the World Bank by tradition, while Europe runs the IMF. This arrangement to balance the influence of the West on global markets was already under increased criticism as non-Western powers like China and others emerging from the developing world want a shot at running both organizations. Two years ago, the US and EU agreed to an “open, transparent, and merit-based process” for appointing leadership — but with the EU staggering through debt crises in several of its member states, it needs that spot perhaps more than it has in decades. Don’t be surprised if the “very, very strong, able candidates from the developing world” get rejection letters this go-around.Uh-huh! I wonder whether Mr Morrissey will be just as anxious to have someone from the developing world when the top job at the World Bank comes up. European countries did need bailing out (regretfully) but they are not alone and where does most of the funding come from if not Western countries? Of course, we could put in an Australian or a Canadian but I suspect that is not what Mr Morrissey had in mind when he talked about those others who are lining up to run another tranzi organization.
I have a much better idea: why don't we investigate how useful the IMF and the World Bank are and, if the answer is not very much, then shut them down or, at least, limit their activity considerably.