Jim Wolfreys on the French elections posted by Richard Seymour

This is a detailed talk that explores the context of the far right's success.  Well worth watching:

Labels: austerity, fascism, france, french elections, merkozy, neoliberalism, nicolas sarkozy, socialism

Sarkozy gently sliding toward crisis. posted by Richard Seymour

I say 'gently' because he isn't actually in the shit yet. His party, the UMP, has won the parliamentary elections, but with a much smaller margin than anticipated, and fewer seats than in 2002. Polls had given the right an astonishing 401-436 seats, more than enough to batter through any agenda they like, while the total left vote was predicted to result in a mere 137-174 seats, with remaining seats for centrists and others. However, the UMP and its one ally looks like it has finished with 319, the PS and its allies 208, the 'New Centrists' 22, the PCF 18, and the Greens 4. (Alternative estimates here). The fascists don't seem to have won a seat at all, and have recorded their worst vote in years. At the same time, Alain Juppe - Sarkozy's 'number two', in several ways - lost to a little-known Socialist. The capitalist press understandably worried, although Sarkozy is still described as having a mandate for 'reform'. Okay, there is no doubt that Sarkozy won, and most people were aware of his programme. There is no doubt that the UMP has won, and most people are aware of their programme. However, as any fule know, the fabled 'democratic process' does not end there. Le Figaro, the conservative French newspaper, writes:

What happened yesterday was certainly not a defeat for Nicolas Sarkozy because Nicolas Sarkozy has a clear majority, but it certainly is a warning ... is ample proof that if the French have adopted the idea of reform they aren't ready to accept those which haven't been amply considered.

What sort of warning shot? Well, this is what has the Wall Street Journal so concerned:

over the past few days, diverging positions have emerged within the government over how to finance Mr. Sarkozy's flagship economic measure: a package of tax cuts that Mr. Fillon has pegged at €11 billion, or $14.72 billion.

France's European Union neighbors are concerned that Paris will fail on its commitment to balance its budget in 2010 if planned spending cuts and new levies aren't adopted this year.

Last week, Finance Minister Jean-Louis Borloo said the government was looking into the possibility of raising the country's value-added tax to help offset the missing fiscal revenue. Mr. Fillon then suggested that the VAT could be increased to 24.6% from its current 19.6% in order to help finance cuts to the social charges paid by companies.

But Mr. Sarkozy himself subsequently stepped in to say he would never approve a VAT increase if there was evidence that it might affect households' spending power ... Mr. Sarkozy hopes that stronger consumer confidence will help create a favorable window to push through tougher labor-law changes later this year and in 2008 ...

To boost the morale of French households, Mr. Sarkozy has carefully sidestepped debates over how to finance France's health-care system.

Sarkozy's key policy is to attack the strength of the labour movement and to roll back worker protections, but to achieve these measures he needs to placate working class voters as consumers. At the same time, a crucial part of his programme was a massive dose of Bush-style tax cuts for the very rich and corporations (the WSJ doesn't mention this part). In order to fund it, at the same time as balancing the budget, they've got to tax the poor a lot more - increasing VAT to 24.6% was the plan - which French workers won't accept. Sarkozy is evidently not confident about starting that fight yet and nor does he seem ready to make significant cuts in public spending. It seems that when the prospect of increased VAT was raised, it generated a widespread reaction against it. Other EU states are a bit wary of Sarkozy's plans at any rate, since their main concern for now is that he balances the French budget rather than cutting taxes for the capitalist class.

It's a very difficult road ahead for the government, then, and a strong labour reaction could easily put their plans under and sink the government. Sarkozy has only been in office since April, and already he's in decline. Wait til he actually tries to do something.

Labels: french elections, neocons, neoliberalism, sarkozy, socialism

Sarkozy in Europe. posted by Richard Seymour

Sarkozy takes office today. Curiously, despite the repression meted out to protesters, he has taken what some see as a conciliatory tack - trying to draft the union leaders into helping elaborate his policies, and bringing PS leaders into his cabinet. Obviously, the Socialists that Sarkozy wants to work with are on the right of the party, and most notable is the offer of Bernard Kouchner to be the foreign minister, reflecting the likely pro-US, 'interventionist' stance under this administration (it isn't as if France has been idling away on the sidelines, though, is it?). However, I suspect something more savvy is afoot. Sarkozy knows that he doesn't have a popular base for his policies, and that French workers - the people he needs to coopt into his liquidation of May 1968 - overwhelmingly didn't support him in this election. So, flattery and negotiations are a smart move. Union leaders have indicated some willingness to negotiate changes, provided they are implemented in a suitable gradual fashion - although it is by no means clear that French workers will simply accept this.

Alex Callinicos takes a look at the impact of Sarkozy's victory across Europe.

The 2005 German federal elections revealed a lack of popular support for both major political parties – the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats, which are equally committed to neoliberalism.

They were forced into a “grand coalition” government that has found it very hard to agree on significant free market “reforms”, let alone to implement them.

In Italy, big business hoped that Romano Prodi’s centre left coalition, elected about a year ago, would be a more a reliable agent of economic restructuring than the right under Silvio Berlusconi’s erratic leadership.

But Prodi’s government has been bedevilled by its narrow parliamentary majority and internal divisions.

What happens in France is likely to have a decisive effect on whether this continent-wide stalemate is broken.

The last major attempt to push through neoliberal measures in France was in 1995. It provoked a huge public sector strike that was the first in a series of social explosions that have stalled such plans.

These have included the teachers’ strikes over pensions in May 2003 and last year’s student revolt against the CPE law that attacked the employment rights of young workers.

If Sarkozy succeeds in overcoming such resistance and forcing through his programme of free market reforms, his victory will have reverberations far beyond France’s borders.

Highlighting the difficulties in this, and the narrowness of Sarkozy's base, Callinicos notes that Sarkozy's demagogy on migrants hasn't made as much impact on public opinion as one might have expected. Further, Sarkozy's tendencies toward 'economic nationalism' and state-led interventionism will tend to undermine his credentials among European leaders as an economic liberal. He was enough of an opportunist to distance himself from the CPE at the last minute. Yet, on the crucial issue of transferring wealth to the capitalist class, there is no doubt as to Sarkozy's aim, which he is confident and ruthless enough to pursue. He hasn't exactly been a shrinking violet on any of his policies, least of all that of rolling back labour rights. If Sarkozy could break the resistance of the powerful French left, "[t]his would break the European stalemate to the right’s advantage":

But winning an election isn’t enough to achieve such a shift in the balance of class forces. It took Thatcher the best part of her first two administrations (1979-87) to bring this change about in Britain.

There was nothing at all inevitable about her victory. The same is true in Sarkozy’s case. He faces the most combative social movements in Europe that have seen off governments of both right and left.

The real test in the coming years is whether these movements can find the powers of resistance and the strong and coherent political leadership they need to beat Sarkozy.

Labels: french elections, kouchner, neocons, neoliberalism, sarkozy

Paris jihad posted by Richard Seymour

I can't resist a title that is sure to enrage the assorted neocons that have been piling into the comments in the post below. Hard-right Sarkozyite blogger ¡No Pasarán! (no, irony isn't his strong point) has some video clips and reports from the protests against Sarkozy last night. The Times reported that protesters were dispersed in Paris with tear gas:

Noemie Capart, 24, a psychology student and supporter of Ms Royal, said: “There weren’t very many demonstrators, but all of a sudden the police charged out with extreme violence.

“I really don’t think it was justified. They used an incredible amount of teargas and I was caught in the middle of it. I was choking and very, very frightened. I think the police wanted to put on a show of force and I hope this isn’t an indication of what Sarkozy’s presidency is going to be like.”

Olivier Besancenot writes on Sarkozy's victory:

The populist demagogy used in this campaign will lead to anti-social, repressive and antidemocratic measures, which will undoubtedly provoke very broad resistance and struggles.

The LCR will now concentrate all its strength on building these mobilisations. It proposes a united front of all the social and democratic forces is immediately built to organise a response faced to the extreme neoliberal and repressive programme of Sarkozy. The LCR will take all the initiatives possible in this direction in the next days.

It has also been shown that a social-liberal left, which tried up to the very end to make an alliance with the UDF of Bayrou, is not a very effective protection against a hard and authoritarian right.

I hope the mass mobilisations begin swiftly, because a few isolated riots and protests on their own don't stand a chance against the armed might a Sarkozyite national security state. Sarkozy still has to win control of parliament, and is flattering Bayrou to accomplish this end. According to some interesting polls, it seems that Sarkozy has won strong support among blue collar workers, a substantial layer of voters among the poor and 15% of the far left vote. Sarkozy's peculiar popularity among some layers of people who would tend toward the left is not necessarily going to translate into support for the UMP. But PS leaders are already responding by inisting they move their agenda further to the right, and there will be an inevitable tendency among some on the left, and in the labour movement, to be pulled along by that trend. The LCR did well despite the tragedy of the radical left's disunity, and are well-placed to take a leading role in a united front against Sarkozy's policies. And the French working class is by no means resigned to accepting a more aggressive version of the CPE or a renewed EU Treaty.

Labels: france, french elections, jihad, neocons, neoliberalism, paris, racism, sarkozy, socialism

Sarkozy's victory party. posted by Richard Seymour

He won with 53% of the vote and only one other competitor, and this is a huge lead according to some commentators. It is slightly more than half of the vote, and a 6% lead. A more sizeable share of a more sizeable vote than many of the supposed 'landslides' in Anglo-American elections - yet still, as tacitly acknowledged by the oleaginous references to a 'divisive campaign' and 'polarisation', he is hardly the bearer of a collective national will. Already the prepared journalistic cliches are being wielded, all the better not to have to confront any issues. He will, we have been told, have to 'unite a divided nation'. A uniter, not a divider: as if. Obviously, that happens to be Sarkozy's line. As he explains: "I love France. I love France, just as one loves someone who is very close to one". Petain, he loved France.

The high turnout, we are told, was a 'victory for democracy': as if a vote for any demagogic racist scumbag, so long as there is a big turnout, is a 'victory for democracy'. We have been told of the 'radically different' proposals of the two candidates - but this is the same media that told us Bush and Gore were 'radically different' because the latter was a bit less inclined to pamper the gun lobby. We have been advised that Royal was 'gracious in defeat', as if a bourgeois Socialist politician would start shouting at the cameras that "the bastards have elected racaille! Get out on the streets! Riot! Karscherise the Sarkozy administration!" The Observer even ponders a 'move to the centre' by the PS, as if it isn't already run by the centre-right with an ineffectual Blairite leader.

Speaking of riots, there have been claims that a vote for Sarkozy would produce riots, and indeed, it is reported that French cops are beating the streets of the banlieues tonight, awaiting the first incidence of trouble. Well, that would be the product of a basic survival instinct. Since, quite simply, Sarkozy means the unemployed youths, the low-paid workers, the immigrants and every other marginalised, exploited, oppressed group in society nothing but harm, a few riots would be a healthy sign of life. Write it down and pass it on, I'm backing the Paris jihad the second it hits the streets. Damn it, Sarkozy's administration should be battered by mass demonstrations and strike waves from the second it starts business.

53% of French voters can go fuck themselves.

Labels: french elections, racism, royal, sarkozy, socialism, working class

Declinism. posted by Richard Seymour

'French decline' is as mythical as 'Anglo-American success'. The crisis of capitalism is, of course, as ubiquitous as the neoliberal diagnosis and solution. France, however, is one of the few places where the neoliberal restoration of capitalist class power is strenuously contested in the public domain - hence Sarkozy's drive for liquidation. I don't want to be a doom-merchant, but the bad news is that Sarkozy is now ahead by ten percentage points in the polls and isn't going to lose the election. That success will give him confidence in taking on even a militant working class movement, never mind one that fragments or retreats under the PS canopy. The good news? Apparently, you can only find that in a book bound by the Gideon Brothers. *glower*

Labels: capitalism, declinism, france, french elections, neoliberalism, sarkozy

An urgent plea for liquidation. posted by Richard Seymour

Labels: badiou, french elections, institut de reserche conjoncturelle, obscure subjectivity, reactionary subjectivity, sarkozy

French Elections News. posted by Richard Seymour

First of all, the turnout is much higher than it was last time round at approximately 84%. Secondly, the voting estimates are as follows:

1. Nicolas Sarkozy (UMP) 29,4 %
2. Ségolène Royal (PS) 26,2 %
3. François Bayrou (UDF) 18,6 %
4. Jean-Marie Le Pen (FN) 10,8 %
5. Olivier Besancenot (LCR) 4,7 %
6. Marie-George Buffet (PC) 2,1 %
7. Philippe de Villiers (MPF) 2,5 %
8. Arlette Laguiller (LO) 1,5%
9. José Bové (Alter) 1 %
10. Dominique Voynet (Verts) 1,6 %
11. Gérard Schivardi (PT) 0,4 %
12. Frédéric Nihous (CPNT) 1,2 %

Actually, as I write, I've seen a new list of estimates on the Wikipedia site, which puts Besancenot's vote slightly higher at 5.4%, enough to entitle the LCR to a substantial sum of money to organise with, no bad thing. But unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't link to a source for its estimate, so I'll stick with the conservative assumptions of the Temps report.

It means a strong vote for Sarkozy, who probably picked up a number of Le Pen voters. Bayrou will not make the second round on this estimate despite getting almost a fifth of the vote and beating Le Pen (against the expectations of some polls), so one can only hope that his votes tend toward Royal, because Sarkozy is fucking menace. However, look at the splintered far left vote! Besancenot is a mere whisker from the 5% threshold, but if there had been a unity candidate for the left-of-left, perhaps with Bove an early leader, their results would have been very sizeable, and probably much higher than their combined votes here, which amounts to 11.3% (including the Greens) or 9.7% (excluding the Greens). It's a strong show of support for the radical and revolutionary left, and Besancenot's vote does him great credit, but it's also a terribly wasted opportunity. A united anti-liberal left getting a strong vote could have produced the groundwork for a new alignment and a new alliance in French politics.

42.7% of the votes went to the right if my calculation is correct (I'm not including the CPNT because I can't tell what their politics are), 18.6% voted for the centrist candidate, and 37.5% voted for the left. The main reason the centrist vote is so strong, I suspect, is because the PS practically threw away their campaign. Not only because Royal was 'gaffe-prone', but also because she offered practically nothing distinctive. Bayrou positioned himself as a "Clintonian" supporting Third Way politics, and a renegotiated EU Treaty, while opposing the Iraq war. Royal is a self-declared Blairite, supporting Third Way politics, and a renegotiated EU Treaty, while opposing the Iraq war. Sarkozy is for tough anti-crime policies, a renegotiated EU Treaty, and 'family values', and so is Royal.

The sight of senior PS right-wingers advocating a PS-UDF coalition, repeatedly, despite official denials from Royal, is indicative of how much head-way Bayrou was able to make with left-voters by positioning himself as a critic of the immigrant-bashing, racist rhetoric and anti-civil-libertarian politics, while the Royal camp was extremely timid on all of those points. If the aim was to create a Blairite centre-left electoral coalition, it has not succeeded. On the other hand, Sarkozy has run a slick campaign with some carefully drip-fed noises to appease the far right (including the eugenicist line that paedophiles and suicides are genetically determined to be that way), and careful cultivation of the UMP electoral base with promises of authoritarian crackdowns on the banlieues.

So, since Bayrou's main beef these days is with the conservatives he was once happy to work with and serve under, one assumes that he will ask his voters to support Royal. PS right-winger and privatiser-in-chief during the last Socialist-led administration is now clumsily appealing to the voters for the losing candidates, emphasising that a vote for Royal would not be merely anti-Sarkozy, but would be a positive vote - for nothing less substantial than 'revival' or a 'house of revival', mind you.

Labels: bayrou, besancenot, french elections, le pen, royal, sarkozy

French elections: revenge of the neocons? posted by Richard Seymour

It is looking increasingly likely that the neoconservatives will see their preferred candidate, Nicholas Sarkozy, elected. It would, for them, be a surprising and satisfying turnaround in the heart of 'Old Europe' or 'social Europe', 'Gaullist' France. To say 'increasingly likely' is not necessarily to say 'very likely' since a few factors have emerged to complicate the picture, as we'll see. There has been a huge heap of horseshit spread around by disgusting hypocrites like pro-war 'leftists' Andre Glucksmann and Pierre Bruckner about Sarkozy's commitment to opposing 'totalitarianism'. Yet, Sarkozy recently met President Mubarak of Egypt, whose recent record on torturing dissidents is discussed here, and assured him that he looked forward to a "trustful and friendly relationship". Sarkozy isn't the only reactionary to get the support of left-renegades. Former communist Alain Soral has apparently signalled his conversion to the fascist Le Pen's camp following a stream of anti-gay and antisemitic comments in the national media. But Sarkozy is working hard to muscle in on Le Pen's rhetoric, while at the same time citing his 'left' supporters.

He is much admired by the American neoconservatives, who have reservations only about his occasional 'economic nationalism'. His most important asset for them is that he will suspend any effort at an independent foreign policy by one of the main European powers, while another potentially independent power, Germany, is largely playing ball under the leadership of Merkel.

The complicating factors are as follows. Firstly, 42% of French voters are undecided, and it is unclear in which direction they will go. Some reports suggest that about half of the industrial working class has not decided who to vote for, and this could well redound to Royal's benefit at the last moment. According to some polls, the centrist Bayrou could well end up opposing Sarkozy in the second round, and left voters would tactically back him. Secondly, there have been suggestions from senior PS figures of a coalition with Bayrou, on the grounds that there are no differences of substance between Royal's policies and those Bayrou. Royal doesn't favour it in public, since the effect would be to abandon her campaign, but it is such a fuck up to date that one can imagine her last-minute capitulation. Thirdly, one recent poll puts Sarkozy and Royal neck and neck, although other polls continue to give Sarkozy a 6% lead. Finally, the position of the radical left-of-left candidates is not strong. Olivier Besancenot of the LCR looks like he's the only far left candidate, including the charismatic Bove, who will make the 5% barrier. So, many of the left-of-left votes could well collapse into support for Royal.

It is hard to overstate what a complete and utter farce this whole thing is. On the one hand, the radical and revolutionary left had a fantastic chance, after its stunning wave of victories against the right-wing government, to unite around a good candidate and to pose a serious left-challenge to the neoliberal consensus. One can say with some certainty that if this effort had not been scuppered by the treacherous sectarianism of some elements, notably the PCF, there wouldn't be senior PS figures bragging that their programme is essentially the same as that of the UDF. On the other hand, the disgrace of nominally 'left' figures flocking to Sarkozy has given some fleeting credibility to his racist diatribes, reactionary rhetoric on crime, neoliberal policies, corruption, and his hawkish, pro-Israel foreign policy stance. Sarkozy offers the French ruling class the opportunity to pursue an aggressive, if difficult, war against the working class and its resistance to the attempts to remove labour protections and create a more casualised, insecure, and eventually lower-paid labour market. He offers the upwardly mobile middle class a policy of aggressive repression in the poor banlieues and tighter immigration controls, while allowing employers to benefit from the even more parlous condition of migrant labourers. He promises to reorient the French state more firmly toward Washington and its interests, in the hopes of gaining French capital a bigger share of the imperial spoils. He will maintain the imperialist mission force in Africa, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia, and the French mercenaries operating in Iraq will not be discouraged.

I wish Besancenot well, and don't underestimate the impact a sizeable vote for him could have. Yet, the extent to which it has already been pissed up against the wall is remarkable, and this should really lead to a bashing together of heads after the whole fracas has played out, hopefully without the grotesque spectacle of a Sarkozy-Le Pen final round.

Labels: capitalism, french elections, imperialism, neocons, racism, royal, sarkozy