I therefore pass it in full ... be careful, it may hurt some people to hear certain "truths".
POLITICAL LIFE - ELECTIONS 2007 -
LUC ROUBAN - RESEARCH DIRECTOR AT CNRS (CEVIPOF)
"The new president will carry an extremely heavy weight on his shoulders"
Nicolas Sarkozy has just been elected president of the Republic. In what state does he find French society?
France is in a state of extreme political fragility. Despite the high participation and interest in the campaign, voters remain defiant with regard to institutions and elites, whether these are political or economic. This is clear when we compare France to other European countries. Interpersonal trust is also weak, that is to say that citizens are distrustful of one another. This is reflected in relationships at work: employees do not trust their hierarchy or their colleagues. The consequence of this fragmentation and these divisions is that French society continues to demand a strong integrating state.
On values, we can consider that the French, whether right or left, are attached to a kind of cultural liberalism: compared to other Europeans, they are not the least tolerant, for example with regard to strangers, homosexuality or soft drugs, and are very attached to secularism. Contrary to popular belief, and despite the "no" to the European Constitutional Treaty, they are not anti-European either, in the sense that the British are, for example. On the other hand, they are not very liberal economically.
"Cultural liberalism" and distrust of economic liberalism. How do you explain, therefore, that Nicolas Sarkozy, who campaigned on the return of conservative values (authority, ethics, etc.) and on “liberation from work”, was elected?
This is what makes me say that the election of Nicolas Sarkozy is partly based on a misunderstanding and that his task looks complicated. Its main success has been to meet the demand of a strong state (national identity, security, etc.). If he does not want to disappoint, he will have to demonstrate that the State is capable of taking things in hand. However, economic room for maneuver is reduced (growth, debt, globalization, etc.). Not to mention that he will have to deal with weak union organizations with a strong protest culture.
However Nicolas Sarkozy seems to have been elected on a relatively clear mandate in a context of very strong electoral participation. Does this not invalidate your thesis of the crisis of political representation?
Some speak of a peaceful democracy because people went to vote. I will not be so optimistic: the political life of a country is not measured simply by an election, but by long-term behavior. In addition, the campaign was built on pretense. It was more publicized than ever with potentially negative effects: the great volatility of the themes gave the feeling of a kind of self-service, of supermarket voting, which did not allow clear priorities to be established and led candidates to propose everything and its opposite. How can we be both nationalist and Atlanticist? Or at the same time open to European liberalism and defend the French public service? This over-media coverage meant that certain fundamental questions, such as the impoverishment of the middle classes, were not tackled head-on.
Finally, the political crisis is not so far when we observe that the “anti-system” vote in the first round, including that in favor of François Bayrou, attracts almost half of the votes.
Looking back, how do you analyze the “Bayrou phenomenon”?
The centrist leader relied on an electorate very critical of the right and the left, expressing in particular a rejection of the patronage of partisan systems. In fact, the politicization of the entire public service since 1974 and even more since 1981 is a French specificity that is strongly contested. In this, the success of François Bayrou can be interpreted as the search for a new political order composed of a renewed elite without concessions to the networks of power.
Is there not a contradiction between the desire expressed by part of the electorate for a renewal of institutional practices and the demand for a strong state?
Jacques Chirac has finished liquidating the Gaullist heritage - remaining in power despite the cohabitation or despite the denials of the electorate after having made a personal commitment. From this point of view, there is a real expectation concerning the Gaullian practice of the institutions and in particular the political responsibility of the Head of State. Nicolas Sarkozy, who personalized his campaign and gave the image of the strong state, will suddenly carry on his shoulders an extremely heavy weight: he gave the impression that he was capable of absorbing all the contradictions of the electorate, from the center to the far right, but that could backfire on him in the practice of power, especially since he did not commit to changing the institutions much. What response, then, to bring to the equally strong demand for popular representation? Since 1848, France has oscillated between, on the one hand, the bourgeois institutional "moral order" and, on the other, the politics of riot. This is where true bipolarization takes place and it cannot be part of this peaceful democracy that we are describing today.
What can rekindle the streak of contestation?
Unquestionably the issue of the public sector and state reform. The reduction in the number of civil servants, the question of minimum service, the abolition of special regimes, all associated with the question of Europe. The French are very attached to the public service and whatever one says about it they are not in majority favorable to the reduction in the number of civil servants.
INTERVIEW BY CARINE FOUTEAU AND VALÉRIE DE SENNEVILLE
Luc Rouban has just co-edited with Pascal Perrineau a book on "Politics in France and in Europe", at the Editions des Presses of the National Foundation for Political Science.
Source: http://www.lesechos.fr/info/france/4573 ... r=RSS-2000