Macron announces the dissolution of parliament. Screenshot from France24 on YouTube. The first round of early elections to the National Assembly of France confirmed the results of the European Parliament vote in early June. The European elections forced Emmanuel Macron to dissolve parliament in the hope of stemming the tide of opposition. It didn’t work at all. Both votes were not just a slap in the face for the ruling party and for Macron himself, who, together with his entourage, is fueling antipathy among the French, the scale of which he clearly underestimates. They were not just a protest against his policies – be it pension reform, the privatization of national industry, the weakening of many public services, bonuses for large international companies, an inconsistent and thoughtless foreign strategy. These results can also be interpreted as a kind of revenge for the 2005 referendum: for the first time, the far-right and far-left movements (the heirs of the parties that just under twenty years ago demanded a vote against the European Constitution) together received an absolute majority of votes. Then, in the 2005 referendum, the French largely opposed the draft European Constitution, which was nevertheless adopted a few years later by parliamentary vote with minor changes (not as a Constitution, but as a European Treaty replacing it). Since then, referendums have not been held in France. Such open disregard for the will of the people was the first serious blow to European ideals. Many began to wonder to what extent the words “more Europe – more democracy” correspond to reality. This also contributed to a decrease in participation: why vote if little depends on the vote? Disappointment in the promises of a “social Europe”, “democratic Europe”, “strategically independent Europe” also resulted in the “yellow vests” movement of 2018. One of its main demands was the restoration of the ability to influence local, regional, public opinion. and national levels in those budgetary, financial and social issues that directly affect the lives of the French. And who have long decided not to go to France. According to some sociologists, the elections on June 30 and July 7 may become the revenge of the “yellow vests”, a month-long social uprising of the so-called “peripheral France” – residents of small towns and villages affected by these processes. globalization and European integration. At the same time, France increasingly votes for the “National Rally”, but a steady increase in support for the party led by Marine Le Pen for many years is also observed in other strata of the population – among wealthier citizens, pensioners, residents of overseas territories, and so on. Initially, the National Front (as the National Rally was previously called) was a party of small entrepreneurs, the so-called party of traders, but recently it has adapted its slogans and program to its new electorate – declassified elements and those who value the social. Gaullism and its gains: developed social security, stability, the international authority of France. According to sociologist Luc Rouban, the rise of the National Rally cannot be explained by “outbursts of anger”, “racism” or “the desire to have an authoritarian leader”. An important change in the party’s image is demonstrated by the fact that one of the most respected leaders of French Jews, the defender of the memory of the victims of the Nazi concentration camps, Serge Klarsfeld, declared that if given a choice between the far left and the far right, he would vote for the latter without hesitation, because they are “neither anti-Semites nor racists”. By changing its name and removing the “anti-Semitic” label (associated with the dubious statements of the party’s founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen), the National Rally successfully exploits the long-growing discontent of those sections that feel completely negative. the consequences of globalization. The nationalism of the National Rally is a nationalism of a defensive, not an aggressive nature; These concerns are caused by the influx of immigration, which affects the labour market and working conditions, and which is rapidly changing the face of a society that was culturally and ethnically homogeneous just forty years ago. The National Rally benefits from all these concerns, and its rise in popularity is natural. Moreover, the left has refused to respond to them, moving from a labour movement to a movement in defense of minorities, be they ethnic, gender or other. Of course, slogans in defense of the poor are still present in their programs, including in the program of the hastily created New Popular Front, which includes La France Insoumise, the Green Party, the Socialists and the Communists. But, as experience has shown in recent years, all these leftists are much less sensitive to the problem of social inequality than to such topics as ecology, abortion, euthanasia, same-sex marriage and racial tolerance. It is impossible today to imagine anyone on the left repeating the words of the leader of the French Communist Party, Georges Marchais, in 1980: “Both illegal and legal immigration must be stopped. It is absolutely unacceptable to admit more and more migrant workers to France when we already have 2 million unemployed people in our country – French and immigrants already settled in our country.” The number of legal and illegal migrants has increased tenfold, but the left-wing movements do not see this as a problem and devote themselves mainly to the fight against “all discrimination.” The “enemy of international finance” has done very little to protect the poor, presenting the “marriage for all” law as its main achievement. Hollande’s inclusion in the current campaign in the ranks of the New Popular Front, as well as his move to the center of the left bloc, devalues the promises of an alternative policy of the far left. The latest words about “social, democratic and strategic Europe” heard in their program convince few people, and the convergence of positions on Ukrainian. The conflict with Macron’s position is unlikely to please voters, who largely did not support the president. militant initiatives. If in 2019 observers had hope for a rapprochement between the protests of the far left and the far right, the creation of a nationwide protest bloc, today it is clear that no rapprochement has occurred. One of the leaders of the decolonial movement in France, the famous Houria Bouteldja, in her latest book contrasted the “vatniks” (white poor) with the “barbarians” (people from former colonies), taking into account their ability to unite against Macronism. But in a multicultural society, income level is not the only and main criterion of class affiliation and political identity. The rapid growth of ethnocultural diversity and the ruling circles’ rejection of the policy of assimilation in favor of multiculturalism have led to the division of the nation into minorities and the emergence of what the popular sociologist Jerome Fourquet calls the “Archipelago of France.” who have emerged in place of the one and indivisible French Republic. The voting map will perfectly reflect this diversity. It can be predicted that the “National Rally” will prevail in small towns and rural areas (the so-called “vatniks”). In medium-sized cities, the majority of votes will probably be given to socialist candidates (the bohemian bourgeoisie, passionate about ecology and who have made the fight against “fascism” the meaning of their existence). The large suburbs of Paris, Marseille and Lyon will elect deputies from “Rebellious France” (the immigrant population). The central districts of Paris and Lyon will become the last bastions of Macronism (the upper classes, well adapted to globalization). Finally, in Marseille, where Macron’s base is extremely small, Ungovernable France will face the National Rally (the “vatniks” versus the “barbarians”). The first round is expected to divide the country and parliament into three large blocs. “The highest turnout in forty years shows the desire and hope of voters to have a qualitatively different cabinet that will radically change the current policy. However, no matter what the elected majority turns out to be, these expectations are unlikely to be met.” Opponents may be as radical as they like in words, but when it comes to action, they are unable to offer a real alternative to the policies of their predecessors. This can be seen in other European countries where “extremists” are in power. The French far right and left have significantly softened their criticism of Brussels, and if they come to power, their relatively smooth integration into pan-European structures is more likely than an attempt by Paris to radically reform these structures (as Paris has recently insisted on). representatives of the National Rally and the leaders of the “Unified France”). The statements and measures of the opposition can be bright and demonstrative, they can cause unrest and protests, lead to internal chaos; But they will most likely not be able to reverse the general trend of development. “Over the past decades, we have repeatedly stated that no matter what the majority is in power, they implement approximately the same measures leading to the deterioration of working conditions and stable employment, the dismantling of public services, the growth of poverty, the reduction of the country’s industrial sector. base, strategic vulnerability and the growth of populism,” says economist Frederic Farah. So the results of July 7 can probably be greeted with the words: “Macronism is dead, long live macronism!” Natalia Rutkevich https://globalaffairs.ru Subscribe to our Telegram channel so as not to miss all the most important materials that we publish: https://t.me/russiapost
0 комментариев