Strategy sellout
An eclectic coalition cheered the election of Nicolas Sarkozy on Sunday night: American neocons, the European Commission, the European right and the New Labour leadership celebrated the large victory of the rightwing candidate after another impressive turnout. They hailed the "sincere friend" of the United States, the supporter of greater flexibility on trade, the man who will introduce a good dose of Thatcherism in France and the partisan of a short, practical European treaty. What is more, these proponents of the Anglo-Saxon "free market" model hope that Sarkozy will put the left in its place. And who knows, maybe he will convert the French to the neoliberal agenda that, so far, a majority of them has stubbornly rejected. In France and across the world, there is a real shiver about this election: will Nicolas Sarkozy manage to stop the cyclical movements of rebellion against neoliberal policies? Over the past 15 years, French workers have successfully defeated the greatest attacks on their social state. This is unique in the west. This French singularity angers those who feel that neoliberal economics are not politically and ideologically driven, but the best science can offer.
In 1995, the general strikes against the austere policies of the Juppé plan paralysed the country's transport structure for over a month, yet they received great popular support. The government had to withdraw the plan and subsequently the right lost the 1997 elections. In 2005, the French voters rejected the European Constitutional Treaty by a large majority, on the grounds that the document would facilitate the dismantling of public services and would place Europe under the yoke of unfettered markets. In 2006, protestors saw off the attempt by the De Villepin government to undermine labour laws for younger workers.
Will Sarkozy emulate Margaret Thatcher and tame the French trade union movement? Will he manage to undo French labour laws or undermine the right to strike? Will he, in short, break the strong egalitarian ethos of French society? And, if he is successful, will the Socialist party finally cease to be "socialist" altogether and come in line with the post-Thatcherite New Labour?
It is too early to answer those important questions. However, it is possible to reflect upon the demise of the French left. First, the left should have never lost this election. After three resounding electoral victories against an unpopular rightwing government in 2004 and 2005, this crushing defeat is quite extraordinary. Despite a robust anti-Sarkozy mobilisation in the second round, Ségolène Royal was more emphatically defeated than Lionel Jospin in 1995. Given the tactical voting on the left in the first round, one can consider that the socialist's 25% in the first round constituted quite a mediocre result. In other words, Royal did not prove an electoral asset as expected, but rather a liability.
Second, Royal was facing the most detested and loathed French politician (except Jean-Marie Le Pen). Borrowing heavily from the American right on economic and moral issues, Sarkozy's politics are totally at odds with the more egalitarian, secular approach to politics of mainstream French politicians. It is also ironic that Sarkozy has managed to come out of the televised debate against Royal as the calmer and more tolerant of the two.
Third, it is clear that voters have shifted to the right when one looks at Sunday's results. In particular, Sarkozy has appealed to large sections of the working class (some of them being former Front National's voters). However, there is nothing new here. The trend started in the 1980s, but it did not stop the left from winning a number of elections since then. Furthermore, it seems unwise to jump to the conclusion that popular support for the right represents an adhesion to Sarkozy's free-market policies. Things are more complicated than that. It is clear that Sarkozy's strong stance on immigration, law and order and national identity has appealed to working-class voters. It is far less obvious that the same voters would approve of the policies of economic deregulation, or back the dismantling of the social state. Sarkozy shrewdly talked about the "right to work more and to earn more", an indirect attack against the 35-hour week implemented by the socialists. Royal did not argue consistently against this fallacy. Currently, any working hour above 35 hours is paid at a higher rate. Sarkozy plans to scrap those higher rates. This means that most workers may soon have to work more and earn less than at present. Instead of counter-attacking on this point, Royal could only evoke the rigidity of the law, giving further ammunition to Sarkozy to rubbish a truly progressive reform.
Fourth, the socialist candidate focused the first part of her campaign on the issue of "participating democracy"; a theme which has appealed to middle-classes, but has not struck a chord with the rest of the population. Conversely, Royal did not consistently attempt to underline the correlation between free market policies, social insecurity and delinquency. When Sarkozy declared that people "are born paedophiles, and it is also a problem that we do not know how to treat this pathology", he amazingly got away with it. Royal could only reply that it was a matter for the scientists to discuss. The patriotic overtones of her campaign (the flag, the national anthem) looked artificial and out of step with the internationalist tradition of the Socialist party. It was above all an awkward move given that it is natural territory of Le Pen and Sarkozy.
Ségolène Royal is obviously not the only person responsible for this débacle. The sectarianism of far left parties that failed to unite in the first round played an important part in demoralising leftwing voters. However, because it is the main party on the left, the Socialist party should take most of the blame. The party "elephants" decided to back Royal in late 2006, despite the fact that until then she had only played a minor role in party debates. They did so because at the time opinion polls predicted that she would easily beat Sarkozy. Consequently, the moderate but socially reformist programme of the party was shelved. Royal was given carte blanche to develop her campaign themes, mixing Blairite soundbites, humanistic generalities and tough remarks on law and order. This was at best an erratic campaign, at worse, a farcical one. This electoral episode has underlined once more how cynical and how detached from popular realities this current socialist leadership is.
Read more about the French elections here.