You have undoubtedly noticed the sudden stir that has been agitating social networks for a few days now, the elections are approaching…
Indeed, on May 25th we will vote to elect our regional, provincial, and European representatives. Yesterday, in France, the first round of municipal elections (choice of mayor) took place, which resulted in a profound disavowal of the policy led by the socialist president François Hollande.
With 46.54% of the votes in favor of the UMP-UDI coalition, it is the right that is the big winner of this first round. However, two other lessons challenge democrats. On the one hand, the abstention rate, which breaks a historical record at 35.87%, and the breakthrough of far-right candidates with a triumph in the first round of Steeve Briois in Hénin-Beaumont, a city of nearly 25,000 inhabitants, so close to us…
Can we already draw lessons from this election regarding the reasons for the inexorable rise for nearly 20 years of far-right theses, and can we find similarities in Belgium?
In the municipal elections in France, voters will have to deal with tripartites
Earthquake this morning at Matignon and the Élysée Palace: the socialist party, which has control over the Presidency, the National Assembly, the Senate, and the municipalities, receives a terrible slap: 37.74% of the votes against 46.54% of the votes granted to the UMP-UDI coalition. It is evident that this result is a sanction vote against the policy led by the French president François Hollande.
It must be said that the missteps and affairs that have undermined the first two years of François Hollande’s five-year term have not been lacking. No one will forget the Cahuzac affair as well as the recent scandal of the wiretaps of Thierry Herzog, Nicolas Sarkozy’s lawyer, not to mention the incredible imbroglios that exist in the presidential majority between the PS and the Greens on certain campaign promises of the president that will not be kept (the Notre-Dame-des-Landes airport, the closure of the Fessenheim nuclear power plant, to name just two).
However, what worries the French citizen, but also the European one, is the inexorable rise of far-right candidates to the point that for the second round of municipal elections next week, the voter will have to deal with many tripartites since the far-right candidates qualify for the second round.
The republican pact, a historical mistake in France and Europe
For nearly 20 years, the National Front has been gaining votes in France and sees its weight and importance strengthen from election to election. For nearly 20 years, the leaders of traditional parties have not heard the message of the polls.
French voters are tired of the solutions advocated by traditional parties, and they make it known in two complementary ways: by abstaining from voting and by voting for the extremes. Make no mistake: not voting is the democratic expression of a very clear choice, and this choice is to tell politicians: “You disappoint us! You do not meet our needs.”
The entire French political class is responsible for this result. It must be said that we have rarely seen such a flood of mediocrity in the political life of the Hexagon. We no longer count the scandals, the absurdities, and the low blows exchanged by the leaders of the PS and the UMP. The French voter is right to feel disillusioned in the face of such a deluge of pathos. When a minister in charge of the budget and the repression of tax fraud is prosecuted by Justice for not declaring the existence of bank accounts in Switzerland and Ireland, and when a sitting president is caught in escapades on a scooter, one must accept that the voter reacts.
For 20 years, the PS and the UMP have formed a republican front to hinder the National Front. This is, in our opinion, a historical mistake that will be prolonged during this second round of municipal elections in France. Traditional parties do not admit that the National Front is a republican party and that voters can freely choose to embrace the political program of this party. By demonizing the National Front and excluding it from any political responsibility, traditional parties only exacerbate the resentment of FN voters. How, indeed, can one admit that a political party that collects nearly 20% of the votes in the presidential elections has only two representatives in the National Assembly (Marion Maréchal and Gilbert Collard)?
The French left, in the great tradition of left-wing politics, does not understand this and loudly asserts, on the evening of this first round, that it will form the republican front by urging its voters to vote for a UMP or UDI candidate in the event of a tripartite. This is a historical mistake! Indeed, there is no need to infantilize voters who decide very well on their own for whom to vote. Furthermore, it denies FN voters the substance and responsibility of their choice. Yes, some voters are seduced by the demagogic and dangerous theses of the FN, and traditional parties would do much better to improve their governance and results on the ground rather than forming an anti-democratic republican barrier.
On the other hand, the UMP, through its former president, has marked a rightward shift by breaking the republican pact and instituting the “neither-nor” policy. Neither socialist nor far-right. In doing so, the French right accepts the voter’s choice and takes the risk of leaving power to far-right candidates, which is the least mark of respect in democracy.
In Belgium, the PS is hardly more visionary than the French PS
In Belgium, we cannot speak of a republican front but rather of a particratic coalition. Our traditional parties agree to form what they call (not without a lustful disdain), the “sanitary cordon“, nothing less, excuse the expression!
Yesterday at the PS congress in Ixelles… Mr. Elio Di Rupo already stated that the PS would never govern with the N-VA, that is to say, with a separatist party. In doing so, the Belgian PS makes exactly the same mistake as its cousin across the Quiévrain.
How can one not understand that this irresponsible declaration by a Prime Minister will only exacerbate the sympathizers of the N-VA?
Whether Mr. Di Rupo likes it or not, he will one day be obliged to govern with the N-VA, which, as long as it does not access responsibilities, will inexorably strengthen until the point where it takes power.
But how can one conceive of democracy in a country that has 60% Flemish voters, 40% of whom vote N-VA, and which is led by a PS Prime Minister who relegates them to the rank of pariahs of democracy?
In our opinion, the definition of democracy is to call to responsibility the parties that have been acclaimed by the votes so that voters can first have the satisfaction of seeing their choices respected (this is the least one can do if one wants to fight against abstention) and then measure the quality of the policy implemented by the acclaimed party.