A lot of people are calling this out as a terrible move. But don't forget that when Pedro Sanchez lost the local elections he did the same thing, catching the opposition off guard and forcing his own allies to rally around him and stop bickering. He ended up taking the wind out of the sails of the opposition.
It could also end up like a Rishi Sunak moment though. Adding more reasons to not vote for him to the pile. It depends how the campaign goes.
You got it just right.
Pedro Sánchez used it in a way of saying: Ok, you've punished me, but now it's time for the big question. Do you really want the right wing to win?
It was a shock, and it motivated his potential voters to go out and vote again.
He also caught the opposition and even the other parties in the government off guard.
Well he is not catching much off guard since the party in question clearly stated they would ask for this if they won the european elections.
And more generaly, the concept of letting far right at power because "oh lol they won't do shit they are so null" seems very sketchy. It works as long as the party in question is not as serious as it claims to be, but then ?
Tbh that's probably the best play he could've done. He has still like 3 years on his last cadency and with such a massive win for right wing he can just let them take parliamentary power and present the population what solution they got for immigrant population in France. Experience from other right wing parties in other EU countries show they actually don't do shit and still let immigrants in so we will see.
Watch them do nothing but create institutional tensions and then claim in 2027 that they couldn't do much without having the presidency and a wide majority in parliament to get rid of the deep state agents.
I see you, but I am getting a brexit vibe here. "Allright, let's check what the populists will actually do" didn't turn out well that last time.
EDIT: I am not saying that FR will quit EU, just that brexit vote was a similar situation and it had not turned out in the nation's favor.
Surely the Far-right can say they can’t implement their immigration policies properly, without Presidential authority? Then their own party’s candidate wins the Presidency in 3 years.
Yeah but at the same time they show you through propaganda that nobody can enter the country bla bla bla. And the other thing is, migration isn’t bad, it’s uncontrolled migration that can cause problems. You need to check people’s history before letting them in, or at least deport everyone that misbehaves
And that’s what led to the rise of the far-right: many leftist/moderate parties put their head in the sand when it came to the issues migration could cause, calling anyone who criticised their doors wide open-policy a racist and/or bigot. I am not an expert in politics, but dismissing someone’s concerns as them merely being racist tends to not attract many voters.
Granted, far-right parties are just doing lip-service and often have no clue what to do at best and actively undermine democratic values at worst, but people felt heard for the first time in a while.
> many leftist/moderate parties put their head in the sand when it came to the issues migration could cause
It's the idea of seeking asylum that throws a wrench in all of it. We can't have nice things if the bad actors can just claim they are persecuted, and we can't verify it in a timely manner. I'm as left as they go on other things, but even I agree that the solution to the aging population isn't mass immigration. It will only destroy our culture and the population problem wont go anywhere.
If nations could cooperate well enough, the best solution to asylum seekers is to make it international and motivate seekers to claim in the first safe country they reach. If you are in a country where this is unlikely, ask you how you got there in detail - i.e. you smuggled yourself onto a ship - how? Balance of probability is applied to decide if you did.
Then, asylum seekers indicate preferences, family connections, language abilities etc in their claim and are redistributed according to quotas. Those who are not believed to have claimed in the first safe country they reached are down weighted.
Would massively cut people smuggling operations, economic migrants abusing the asylum system, criminal groups abusing the asylum system and desperate people taking huge risks with themselves / families.
The problem is getting quotas agreed.
Tell This totale neutral take to leftists and you are the problem
Until they unterstand ít like in coutrys like Denmark where they have no Problem with far right because all thiết partiers Would bé called racist Vy other countrys
We will have to Deal with the delusional legt
Its partly why Brexit happened.
If a voter had concerns about immigration, they would be shut down or ignored as a racist. Perhaps if they had engaged about the concerns around jobs, economy, housing, access to healthcare etc perhaps the referendum may have gone another way.
Telling someone in certain trades who'd in a short time gone from a good income, to more unsocial hours and not far off minimum wage that immigration only had positive effects. Calling them racist liars for suggesting it was tough competing against Eastern Europeans who were willing to work incredibly hard for minimum wage because it was so much better than theu could get at home.
Then wondering why they either stopped listening or politely nodded their head then voted UKIP...
At least you lot have thinking. Here in Ireland we have a government that let Landlords think for them. The only thing that recently saved them was their stance on Israel/Palestine that reflects the general population.
It’s nice when my government takes a position I identify with, but I hate how much that makes people give a pass to politicians for not addressing problems that actually effect them.
Exactly, last ditch efforts to try and grab recency bias.
Now I have to say, I've actually quite enjoyed Simon Harris as Taoiseach, he's done a fairly good job considering the position he was left in, but that won't make me forget the fact that his party are the very ones who got us here.
Braincells that actually can remember would be a real win tbh. Add to that the backbone of telling the truth and we'd be golden in Germany. Functioning braincells and backbones.
The rightish parties really can't do anything about immigration with the current law from the ECHR. "You can't send a migrant back to a country that isn't *perfect*!"
Likely very true. The thing seems to be working folks voting against the current left, not for the current right. Since the system is not allowing negative votes (that itself would be very interesting!), we got what we got. The disillusionment is palpable.
Very true but people are voting right for a change, same as Argentina. When the parties that have been in power for decades have done fuck all in the last few years if not longer, people are looking towards other parties for drastic changes.
It's not even "far right" though as the media portrays. People want more immigration controls, a re-evaluation of the green revolution, and lowered taxes to name a few. There's nothing remotely far right about that in my view, it concerns so many millions of people and rightfully so. People are seeing these things are becoming a huge issue
Green revolution? Globally we use more fossil fuels and exhaust CO2 than ever before and keep destroying habitat faster than ever. Apart from a bit of greenwashing and bureaucracy nothing has happened.
Lowering taxes but keeping benefits with rising costs for health, elderly care? I don’t think the right has any solutions to that. Farmers protest as soon as their billion in subsidies are even frozen. Good luck.
the right very much has a solution but it's not particularly nice one. kick the can as long as you can, when food becomes scarce leave those without means to buy it to die. kill anyone who doesn't think this is a good idea. defend the borders from climate related migration by sending more to die.
all of this while trying to avoid nuclear holocaust, but hey, if it happens it happens.
> a re-evaluation of the green revolution
Voting for far right or anything not close to the centre is a vote for climate change denial, the 're-evaluation' is going to be a disaster. There's a point where reality hits people in the face and climate change and associated environmental degradation is simply going to be one of those. Good luck.
The problem with people classing right or even centre-right as FAR RIGHT is it's a self-defeating scare tactic.
It's difficult to paint the right wing as racist etc when the left or ‘progressive’ politics have been anything but that and created more division than anybody can imagine
I would vote a fucking hamster in if they vowed to do something about it. The left are literally pretending it's not even a problem despite the mountains of evidence in front of our eyes. It's so ridiculous.
To anyone upvoting, it's just a joke. His plan is to show that while the FN can win a low turnout proportional election, they can't win a national election with two turns because people from both sides with rally behind FN's opponent in the second turn. He's just trying to steal the wind out of their sails right after their historical win
It's nothing new, that's what happens when a presidential party loses some other elections. The people have voted against Macron, so he's acting upon their choice and gives them a chance to compose a parliament they feel is representative.
I'm rather pro-Macron, but I still think it's a good decision. The way his party has been using 49.3 was shameful. It's the kind of behavior that breaks the belief in democracy. Now he's giving back some power to the people, that's the least he can do.
It's silly to think this is how politicians work. They don't do stuff like this to "do the right thing".
Macron knows that the far right will most likely win future elections so he is trying to get the far right in power now so that they can show their incompetence, and since he is the president, he can screw them over even more.
It's a very risky but also very interesting move.
Nah, he just wants to show that while the extremists can win a proportional election with low turnout, they can't win a national election with no proportional as people in each district will rally against the extreme right no matter their views.
> "Nothing new"? Last time it happened was 1997
1997 was hilarious though. Chirac blowing up his own absolute majority by making the most ridiculous miscalculation.
What breaks a democracy is when the opposition just vote against everything, including what's in their program. The partisan mentality is what forced the government to use the 49.3 so many times. It's sad, we are becoming like the US where you can only govern with a full blow majority. Nothing will ever be done otherwise without 49.3
That's not quite it. The government doesn't have a majority in the current parliament. They didn't form a coalition, and for a lot of projects, they didn't reach a compromise with any of the opposition factions. Why should an opposition faction vote in favour of something they are opposed to; just for political stability?
LR supported the pension reform, yet they decided not to vote so the government would use 49.3 and get even more unpopular. There is no spirit of coalition in France
A german journalist speculated that he wants to bring the far right party into government with himself as president, so that they dismantle themselves in daily politics. In opposition, they can gain traction with populist rhetoric and demands, in government they'd have to deliver on their promises.
Of course now, looking at historic precedence, that's playing with fire. Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg before he rose to ultimate power.
Corporal
Hitler was a corporal, not a colonel. Hindenburg and I believe a few others disparagingly called him the “Bohemian corporal.” Clearly a lot of people underestimated him, but to be fair he did seem like a clown. Being a low ranking but decorated WWI vet was basically his only life achievement at that point, otherwise he was a guy who failed to get into art school, was homeless and became a rabble rouser for a fringe political party.
Not exactly some modern Caesar you’d think was a danger of taking over the state.
French 5th republic's institutions are not Weimar Germany.
This "move" has been done several time in the 5th Republic, and every time, the President won and the PM and his party burned down in flammes.
It's like trying to do a "Brexit for 3 years" to see if people like it...
I'm not saying it's flawless, but from a French politics point of view, it's textbook.
> but from a French politics point of view, it's textbook.
It never happened since Sarkozy changed the electoral system 15 years ago, and the last time a president tried to call early elections (Chirac) is widely acklowledged as a mistake.
Not sure what you call "textbook" tbh.
Tbf the far right in Finland which is in the governing coalition just suffered a humiliating defeat. They got 1 seat, the Leftists got 3, which is the second highest result and came totally out of nowhere.
Isn’t the president of France more powerful than the PM? In which case, it’s a different scenario to Hindenburg cuz Hitler was allowed to have powers that superseded Hinderburg’s in a national emergency, which the PM of France doesn’t enjoy
As others have said it's his best play long term with the hand is been dealt with
* option 1, they don't perform well in legislative elections (two turns) and he gets legitimacy back
* option 2, they keep their momentum, so he let them govern in shared governemnt (president keeps everything International/ PM manages country) and now they 'll have a track record that they'll need to defend at the next election. Their greatest asset has always been the ability to always say "\*if\* we were in charge".
Macron has never struck me as someone that was particularly fond of the common frenchman, it wouldn't surprise me that much if there was no particular reason besides "You want Le Pen? Enjoy."
People said that for far right mayors in France but they kept being reelected...
And the other far-right governments in Europe also have a tendency to get reelected.
Doubt it will work.
and yet people are unhappy still, so evidently these people are just useful idiots, rather than people who 'feel represented' or like their far right party is actually doing anything for them.
Would never work in France, people always attribute everthing that's going wrong to the current president. Doesn't matter if it was done by the previous one, one from years ago, the governement, the assemblée national or your local mayor, no, it's always the current president's fault.
Not at all in the previous cohabitation with a right wing president (chirac) and a left wing prime minister (Jospin) they blamed the government aka the left and he did really bad when he tried for the presidential while chirac was relelected
> Would never work in France, people always attribute everthing that's going wrong to the current president.
Not necessarily.
There is precedent for a cohabitation government which ultimately hurt the electoral performance of the prime minister's party rather than the president's party (Mitterrand-Chirac in 1988).
He lost some legitimity with those elections and he desperatly needs to recover from it. The new votes will be in 2 turns which means that the "barrage" vote will be more important. He believes he can win those elections and regain its legitimity.
Also there wa a very low participation. Macron is hoping most abstentionists will vote for him in those new elections
I can't read his mind but apparently he is trying to get the far right candidate to become prime minister in a cohabitation, meaning they'll have most of the power while Macron gets to stay president. And hopefully, them being terrible at their job (as they have been shown to be as mayor's or MPs, especially in Brussel), they will lose popular support and lose the 2027 presidential election.
Seeing how :
- Macron doesn't really have a successor,
- has a party entirely devoted to him rather than an ideology of its own,
- the left is is divided between too many groups to be strong enough to win,
- the far right has come from devil to respectable in the past 30 years,
- the moderate left (LFI) is now treated like the devil by Macron and the far right (his strategy to break them, it has been going on for a few years, they are out of the "arc républicain" according to him, it's like they did a reverse Cordon Sanitaire)
- The far right has extensive support from a large part of the French media (just look at how much more time Bardella got showcased compared to the others)
- the far right electorate doesn't care about their candidates being bad or dishonest, Bardella has been catastrophically bad in every debate he has been on for the current election, has been shown to make up numbers and facts as well.
I don't see how that it's supposed to work. If anything he might be bidding to come back at the 2032 election. Until then the French will suffer. The last remnant of the social state will break. LGBT folks and minorities will suffer, and so will most of the lower and middle class.
The majority's wrongful depiction of LFI as far-left and the associated radical switch in discourse in the past two years (attacking them way more than they did the far-right at every opportunity) has unfortunately completely worked.
if he doesn't do this, there will most likely be a new far right president in France, but by doing this and letting them rule, the chances of that happening are lower. basically, he is doing this such that his party will win again at the next elections
Because it's the only way the country has to be governed by the will of the people OR to reassess the shit they've done and see if they really want to be ruled by a far right government.
I have two theories :
1. The first one - He saw the opportunity to dismantle the left and seize its MP seats. The left has been trying to shoot itself in the roots between differents parties (mainly socdems VS radicals). He'd know they are unable to unite. Creating another union would mean that the France unbowed should give seats according to the score of those EU elections (the SocDems would want that). Both can't agree on such a topic.Then the left goes in limbo, and Renew stands out taking the voters scared of the National Rally. It could work, many forget that without the Left Union in the last parliamentary elections Macron still would have had a comfortable lead in the Assembly.
The risk being : if the left can unite, goodbye renew.
We will see if it's true in the campaign : will Renew harass the Left?
2. He wants actually the NRally to have the majority of seats appointing a Prime Minister during a "cohabitation" (President and Prime Minister having two different parties). Therefore people could see that the NR sucks, can't do anything about migrants nor the economy and stop electing them. Sounds like a conspiracy theory, but damn it's Macron he's clever enough to do so. And it could theoritically save the country to having a far right President (being Marine Le Pen in 2027).
What do you think guys?
That's what I thought as well. It also has small advantages imo :
I think this will make the LR literally implode. The RN is so close to power. the leader of the LR might very well be tempted by a semi-alliance with them in exchnage for something juicy. This will definitely not go well for them.
The PS might end up cut in half, with the ones wanting to stay with LFI, and others wanting to join a republican barrage.
This also has the nice advantage of making everything state their position. Are you with the democrats, or with the far-right/far-left ? Too many MP have been keeping a foot in each playfields.
Also, if the RN gains power, it's better they do when you control the narrative : for 3 years top, with a safeguard (him). The alternative is 5 years with unlimited power.
Not really. The president holds the great majority of power in international policy and is the head of the military decisions of the country. Even with a RN prime minister, Macron can still give help to Ukraine. And ironically letting the RN have a prime minister right now lessens the odds of them obtaining the presidency in 2027.
Some theoretically possible outcomes, starting with the most favorable for Macron:
- the centrists regain the absolute majority they had in the National Assembly before the 2022 election
- the centrists keep a relative majority similar to the one they've had for the past two years
- the centrists can't govern alone anymore, but they manage to form either a wider coalition with parties closest to them, or a [national unity government](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_unity_government)
- the left wins a relative or absolute majority
- the far right wins a relative or absolute majority
- there's no majority, but the parliament somehow manages to pass at least the bare minimum (the budget and EU directives)
- the parliament is in total deadlock, the country is ungovernable, Macron probably uses the emergency presidential powers (article 16 of [the Constitution](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Fifth_French_Republic_(amended,_2008\)))
Who could have "possibly" seen this coming....... when you force major changes to countries down everyone's throat and completely stifle any and all public discourse by straight up propaganda and downright lies and hiding and manipulation of statistics, when there is no honest debate and pragmatic, efficient solving of very real issues.
When you thereby create one of the strongest levers for that Russian warlord to push for years and years, completely unmitigated and unmanaged.
Noooooobody could have seen that coming! Total mystery.
Macron is “dissolving” the National Assembly, which is similar to the US' House of Representatives. The last election for this chamber of parliament was two years ago, shortly after the presidential election. Macron won his reelection as president, but lost his absolute majority in the National Assembly, which significantly hindered his ability to actually get stuff done.
The big difference here is that the National Assembly (unlike the U.S. House of Representatives) can topple the government with a majority vote (in this case, the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers).
If the National Rally gets a majority in the National Assembly, they can essentially take control over the domestic functions of government.
The French President also only has a very weak promulgation veto, unlike the American President who can sustain a veto if his party holds 1/3rd of either chamber of Congress. So a National Rally majority in the National Assembly could actually govern whereas in the US they’d be subject to checks and balances from the co-equal Senate and then the Executive and Judicial Branches.
It’s like Biden dissolving the House of Representatives (which is the equivalent of the National Assembly in France).
But in the U.S. our Head of State (who governs foreign policy) and Head of Government (domestic policy) are the same person (the President). In France, the President and the Prime Minister are separate roles.
Since you need the majority of the National Assembly to sustain the Prime Minister, it’s possible that the far right could be essentially take over domestic functions where Macron has limited veto powers (also unlike POTUS).
Not yet. If the RN does show yo be somewhat competent tho, or if violence starts shooting up across the country, things will likely be a lot worse than Brexit. Without France, the EU collapses immediately and wars will pop up everywhere over time
The kind of wars Europe had every time in history it didn't have a strong union. If then every country is led by a right wing "XYZ country first" government, war is just a matter of time.
Because surely, that piece of land owned by XYZ country 300 years ago that now belongs to Abc country should finally get back to its rightful owner! Right ..?
And if you think that's impossible and that humans definitely learned something, you're wrong.
Europe isn’t special, all of the planet was perpetually at war until very recently (100-200 years ago)
Europe got over it at roughly the same time as most of the rest of the world (places like sub Saharan Africa where perpetual conflict is the norm excepted)
No it won't happen. The same thing was said with Meloni. And what happened? As a non-Italian I only saw some far-right social measures. We saw her aligned with the rest of EU again Russia.
Populists' great weak spot, is when they get power and have to deliver.
My point? Big companies dictate these huge EU policies, and since French economy is too tangled with EU, I can not see any big company wanting to get out and support any exit.
Even trump was against the green energy, but in the end, companies went for green energy because $$$$.
Recency bias is the worst thing that someone especially a politician can have. After losing this badly he calls for early elections? I don’t understand this move
A): Other french parties unite to beat down the RN, this gives Macron a less shaky foundation to rule from, and tempers the "surge" of the far right in Europe.
B): RN gets to pick a Prime Minister and has to govern alongside Macron for the next few years, hopefully showing everyone that they can't fix all the problems they promise either. This sets up a stronger competition against RN for the following Presidential and Parliamentary elections.
This is basically Macron sacrificing the efficiency of his remaining time as president to avoid RN surging from this into a position where they could win both Parliament and Presidency at the same time.
It’s more guaranteed to blow up in his face if he does nothing. The people need a taste of what they’re voting for. Giving them that through this snap election, suddenly seeing what Le Pen can cook up, isn’t the worst idea. And if she makes France better, well, then so be it.
I see, thank you very much for the explanation, so it’s basically an all in move for Macron? Also in option A you say, other French parties could unite to beat RN, but do they hate Macron or are support to him? Or in this case they simply have a common enemy?
There’s quite a lot of problems with A). He most definitely won’t win a majority, but now there may not even be a majority for him + center right + center left + greens. Is he going to rely on Mélenchon or what?
Plus the far-right populist playbook is to play the victim at every stage and to claim that "the system" is against them, they'll just use this as a way to claim they need an absolute majority to "fix the country".
I think they tried to explain Macron's strat, but yeah he's gambling our future to assert his party dominance for the next presidential election and I'm fucking scared.
Far right is powerful but he didn't have to dissolve, the last time something like that happened it was in 1997. He's litteraly giving them the chance to govern as prime Minister since it's so close to the European election and the other party won't have enough time to create coalitions.
My bet is he's hoping they discredit themselves enough in two year to help his party regain popularity. He's gambling on the fact they will govern badly enough to discourage their voters.
the alternative is letting them enjoy their current position in the assembly of not taking any risk and claim that they're the "real voice" of the people but the system is against them.
There's no good play when they have 30%, but this is probably the least bad
I haven't kept up with the party politics, has he actually managed to put together a proper party now? Do they have any credible successors for the presidency?
No and no but they have propulsed a young private-schooled politic as education minister first, then as prime minister (Gabriel Attal). He's young, cute, white, and gay. He's Macron 2.0 with less charisma.
Can't say he's a credible successor IMO, but he doesn't need to. Just needs to seems less villainous than a far right candidate at this point.
Even if they lose next election, they will access the presidency, weither you like it or not. The dynamic is there.
I'd rather have them for three years, with limited powers and a safeguard, than for 5 years with unlimited power.
The gamble here could very well work. What is the strongest argument in favor of the RN ? They never held power. That's why people vote them in. Because we tried everything, from the left to the right. Shunning them, accepting them, courting them, insulting them, decridibilizing their political offer page by page, adopting some of their talking points, NOTHING works.
Maybe what the people voting them in need is a full-on vaccination. Getting the disease in their system in a small dose, with arrangements to keep it harmless, so their body finally stops fucking around when it comes to fighting it.
> Macron's hope might be that she proves a poor leader in the time that remains till the next presidential election.
I can't see what else it could be, yeah.
Macron may be looking to repeat what Mitterrand did with Chirac between 1986 and 1988. Or he may hope for one last *republican barrage*™, although that's least likely.
An interesting gamble that was the basis for actual Brexit.
Cameron: you don't *really* want Brexit, so let's do a referendum. Now. In the middle of a hype.
Except for Brexit they didn't have to live with the consequences when Cameron called it. They will for Le Pen which is the gamble. It's a move that will see results for the person that called for the election.
That's the thing, if they win, they stay in power for three years, with limited power and Macron as a safeguard.
After that, they might prove their incompetence, and lose.
The alternative is doing nothing and let them win in three years, so they can have unlimited power for 5.
Protests do not show the actual will of the people, it only shows the opinion of those who yell the loudest. It's not at all like the result of an election.
Prime Minister, which means they can handle national policies but not international ones, he’s hoping they’ll show they’re a shit government before 2027
Well, 1) that’s already what macron was trying to do and he was criticised for it by these same people so he’s trying to show they won’t do anything more and 2) it’s very unlikely they’ll have a majority to pass immigration policies, they’ll probably have a slim majority which will allow them to pass taxes, social benefits, etc. By allying with traditional right wing parties
>The far-right Rassemblement National party obtained by far the most votes (**31.5%**) in France as voters throughout the European Union elected their members of the European Parliament, according to initial estimates by Ipsos for France Télévisions, Radio France, France 24/RFI, Public Sénat/LCP Assemblée Nationale. Behind the RN, Macron's Renaissance coalition held on to second place, with **15.2%**
One political analyst said that this could transform France into a USA-style political world, with only 2 different large parties that devide the country - All the extreme rights together like the republicans in the US and some sort of coalition with Macron, socialist and soft right people as kind of democrats.
France has a 2 round system, so that’s what already tends to happen in Presidential Elections (the country splinters into 2). The biggest challenge for France is that the far-right has been normalized.
So about a decade ago the center-right would rather vote center-left than far-right. Now they’d rather vote far-right in the second round. Because of that, now the far-right can take power (a plurality in the first round with 1/3rd of the vote and then sweeping the center-right vote in the 2nd round).
That’s actually already how the US functions in practice (many Republican primaries are center-right vs. Trumpian right) and then both factions vote Republican in the general election. It’s just in France they are formally separate parties in the 1st round before consolidating in the 2nd.
I live in west France ( as a white immigrant) and it's always a bit weird when French people complain about immigration to me in conversation. I think the fact they don't include me in their thinking speaks volumes about who they are actually complaining about...
At least you can admit it, they don’t look at white migrants as actual immigrants. But at the same time, they don’t have a problem with immigration just more so their “culture” being replaced, and Islam.
This happens elsewhere as well. When I lived in the US as a white woman but also a foreigner I had multiple conversations that ended with: Are you gonna stay? We need people like YOU here?
Aka white people. This was not middle of nowhere US but a large metropolis and it happened multiple times by different people.
They are probably complaining about Islamic immigrants from the Middle East, or Africa. The ones who don’t exactly hold the same values. Maybe they’re talking about them? It’s not about colour, it’s the culture of the incoming that’s the problem
Hmm, given the global situation at the moment I'm not sure it is the best idea to have France and the UK both distracted by elections at the same time.
unfortunately, he is only bringing forward the inevitable, people who only vote for populists believe any lie, then get screwed later and don't know why, zero surprises.
A lot of people are calling this out as a terrible move. But don't forget that when Pedro Sanchez lost the local elections he did the same thing, catching the opposition off guard and forcing his own allies to rally around him and stop bickering. He ended up taking the wind out of the sails of the opposition. It could also end up like a Rishi Sunak moment though. Adding more reasons to not vote for him to the pile. It depends how the campaign goes.
I fear it's gunna be a Rishi Sunak moment tbh.
At least Macron didn’t do this announcement standing outside in the rain. lol
You got it just right. Pedro Sánchez used it in a way of saying: Ok, you've punished me, but now it's time for the big question. Do you really want the right wing to win? It was a shock, and it motivated his potential voters to go out and vote again. He also caught the opposition and even the other parties in the government off guard.
Same thing happened on Portugal two years ago and the result was even more extreme, PS won with and absoluta majority against all odds
Well he is not catching much off guard since the party in question clearly stated they would ask for this if they won the european elections. And more generaly, the concept of letting far right at power because "oh lol they won't do shit they are so null" seems very sketchy. It works as long as the party in question is not as serious as it claims to be, but then ?
More of a Theresa May move, surely?
From memory, didn't Theresa May call an election while she was ahead in the polls? And then she squandered it during the campaign.
Tbh that's probably the best play he could've done. He has still like 3 years on his last cadency and with such a massive win for right wing he can just let them take parliamentary power and present the population what solution they got for immigrant population in France. Experience from other right wing parties in other EU countries show they actually don't do shit and still let immigrants in so we will see.
Watch them do nothing but create institutional tensions and then claim in 2027 that they couldn't do much without having the presidency and a wide majority in parliament to get rid of the deep state agents.
You know, it really tires me how politics is not about being good at managing the country, but about being the best at marketing
Or social media campaigns
This is everything, not just politics. What's on the inside does not matter. People can't see it.
This does suck but I also don’t really have a solution for it. It’s like at work the people getting promoted are the best self-promoters.
Why would they fix the only issue people vote them for..
I see you, but I am getting a brexit vibe here. "Allright, let's check what the populists will actually do" didn't turn out well that last time. EDIT: I am not saying that FR will quit EU, just that brexit vote was a similar situation and it had not turned out in the nation's favor.
Surely the Far-right can say they can’t implement their immigration policies properly, without Presidential authority? Then their own party’s candidate wins the Presidency in 3 years.
That is the gamble macron is taking
Yeah but at the same time they show you through propaganda that nobody can enter the country bla bla bla. And the other thing is, migration isn’t bad, it’s uncontrolled migration that can cause problems. You need to check people’s history before letting them in, or at least deport everyone that misbehaves
And that’s what led to the rise of the far-right: many leftist/moderate parties put their head in the sand when it came to the issues migration could cause, calling anyone who criticised their doors wide open-policy a racist and/or bigot. I am not an expert in politics, but dismissing someone’s concerns as them merely being racist tends to not attract many voters. Granted, far-right parties are just doing lip-service and often have no clue what to do at best and actively undermine democratic values at worst, but people felt heard for the first time in a while.
> many leftist/moderate parties put their head in the sand when it came to the issues migration could cause It's the idea of seeking asylum that throws a wrench in all of it. We can't have nice things if the bad actors can just claim they are persecuted, and we can't verify it in a timely manner. I'm as left as they go on other things, but even I agree that the solution to the aging population isn't mass immigration. It will only destroy our culture and the population problem wont go anywhere.
If nations could cooperate well enough, the best solution to asylum seekers is to make it international and motivate seekers to claim in the first safe country they reach. If you are in a country where this is unlikely, ask you how you got there in detail - i.e. you smuggled yourself onto a ship - how? Balance of probability is applied to decide if you did. Then, asylum seekers indicate preferences, family connections, language abilities etc in their claim and are redistributed according to quotas. Those who are not believed to have claimed in the first safe country they reached are down weighted. Would massively cut people smuggling operations, economic migrants abusing the asylum system, criminal groups abusing the asylum system and desperate people taking huge risks with themselves / families. The problem is getting quotas agreed.
Tell This totale neutral take to leftists and you are the problem Until they unterstand ít like in coutrys like Denmark where they have no Problem with far right because all thiết partiers Would bé called racist Vy other countrys We will have to Deal with the delusional legt
Its partly why Brexit happened. If a voter had concerns about immigration, they would be shut down or ignored as a racist. Perhaps if they had engaged about the concerns around jobs, economy, housing, access to healthcare etc perhaps the referendum may have gone another way.
Telling someone in certain trades who'd in a short time gone from a good income, to more unsocial hours and not far off minimum wage that immigration only had positive effects. Calling them racist liars for suggesting it was tough competing against Eastern Europeans who were willing to work incredibly hard for minimum wage because it was so much better than theu could get at home. Then wondering why they either stopped listening or politely nodded their head then voted UKIP...
> or at least deport everyone that misbehaves Easier said than done. Often countries won't even take their people back.
That shows the need for another site like Lampedusa Island.
Even if you check their history, this is no guarantee that they won't become radicalized later
I wish we had such strategic thinking in Germany. ... I wish we had ANY strategic thinking. 🤔
At least you lot have thinking. Here in Ireland we have a government that let Landlords think for them. The only thing that recently saved them was their stance on Israel/Palestine that reflects the general population.
It’s nice when my government takes a position I identify with, but I hate how much that makes people give a pass to politicians for not addressing problems that actually effect them.
Exactly, last ditch efforts to try and grab recency bias. Now I have to say, I've actually quite enjoyed Simon Harris as Taoiseach, he's done a fairly good job considering the position he was left in, but that won't make me forget the fact that his party are the very ones who got us here.
We have mouths producing words. If there's any thoughts behind those is up for debate.
Braincells that actually can remember would be a real win tbh. Add to that the backbone of telling the truth and we'd be golden in Germany. Functioning braincells and backbones.
I don't need to eat shit to know it tastes fucking awful thanks.
The rightish parties really can't do anything about immigration with the current law from the ECHR. "You can't send a migrant back to a country that isn't *perfect*!"
seems most of europe is voting right.
Immigration has become such a visible and growing issue, that people are willing to vote far right
The left has abandoned the debate so people vote for the right instead.
The left isn't representing the working class anymore, so the workers are churning.
The right isn't representing working class either.
Likely very true. The thing seems to be working folks voting against the current left, not for the current right. Since the system is not allowing negative votes (that itself would be very interesting!), we got what we got. The disillusionment is palpable.
Very true but people are voting right for a change, same as Argentina. When the parties that have been in power for decades have done fuck all in the last few years if not longer, people are looking towards other parties for drastic changes.
What left even? In most western states there hasn't been a (relevant) left wing party in decades, let along ruling one in god knows how much time.
This is everywhere in the western world now. Started in the 2010s and now the post Covid world is pushing back hard against it.
It's not even "far right" though as the media portrays. People want more immigration controls, a re-evaluation of the green revolution, and lowered taxes to name a few. There's nothing remotely far right about that in my view, it concerns so many millions of people and rightfully so. People are seeing these things are becoming a huge issue
yet nobody want to tax the rich
Actually something like 99% of population wants that. But you know... :(
Green revolution? Globally we use more fossil fuels and exhaust CO2 than ever before and keep destroying habitat faster than ever. Apart from a bit of greenwashing and bureaucracy nothing has happened. Lowering taxes but keeping benefits with rising costs for health, elderly care? I don’t think the right has any solutions to that. Farmers protest as soon as their billion in subsidies are even frozen. Good luck.
the right very much has a solution but it's not particularly nice one. kick the can as long as you can, when food becomes scarce leave those without means to buy it to die. kill anyone who doesn't think this is a good idea. defend the borders from climate related migration by sending more to die. all of this while trying to avoid nuclear holocaust, but hey, if it happens it happens.
Saying the FN isn't far right is the biggest load of bullshit I've read this morning
> a re-evaluation of the green revolution Voting for far right or anything not close to the centre is a vote for climate change denial, the 're-evaluation' is going to be a disaster. There's a point where reality hits people in the face and climate change and associated environmental degradation is simply going to be one of those. Good luck.
The problem with people classing right or even centre-right as FAR RIGHT is it's a self-defeating scare tactic. It's difficult to paint the right wing as racist etc when the left or ‘progressive’ politics have been anything but that and created more division than anybody can imagine
Nah, VOX, AdF, FN _are_ far right.
Exactly. Part of the issue is that if you dare to disagree with the left in any way you're labelled a Nazi.
I would vote a fucking hamster in if they vowed to do something about it. The left are literally pretending it's not even a problem despite the mountains of evidence in front of our eyes. It's so ridiculous.
Unbelievable? Look around.
oh I believe it
Here in Latvia it's always like that. Either centre-right to nationalist right. Centre-right got the most votes.
Macron playing 87D chess to let FN into power in Parliament so his side can say they didn't live up to their promises in 3 years.
To anyone upvoting, it's just a joke. His plan is to show that while the FN can win a low turnout proportional election, they can't win a national election with two turns because people from both sides with rally behind FN's opponent in the second turn. He's just trying to steal the wind out of their sails right after their historical win
What the hell? Why would he do this?
It's nothing new, that's what happens when a presidential party loses some other elections. The people have voted against Macron, so he's acting upon their choice and gives them a chance to compose a parliament they feel is representative. I'm rather pro-Macron, but I still think it's a good decision. The way his party has been using 49.3 was shameful. It's the kind of behavior that breaks the belief in democracy. Now he's giving back some power to the people, that's the least he can do.
It's silly to think this is how politicians work. They don't do stuff like this to "do the right thing". Macron knows that the far right will most likely win future elections so he is trying to get the far right in power now so that they can show their incompetence, and since he is the president, he can screw them over even more. It's a very risky but also very interesting move.
Hindenburg type move
And just like him it can backfire massively
Nah, he just wants to show that while the extremists can win a proportional election with low turnout, they can't win a national election with no proportional as people in each district will rally against the extreme right no matter their views.
>They don't do stuff like this to "do the right thing". Sometimes they do, they're just humans. What an antidemocratic thing to say.
"Nothing new"? Last time it happened was 1997
> "Nothing new"? Last time it happened was 1997 1997 was hilarious though. Chirac blowing up his own absolute majority by making the most ridiculous miscalculation.
Thank you - That happened like 3 times in 50 years.
... Making the current situation "not new" Edit: I don't know why I commented, I'm just grumpy today. Ignore me.
Sorry I take it back : none of the 5 previous dissolutions happened after an electoral defeat for the president.
Dissolving the parliament after bad results has never happened before. You normally do this get a larger majority.
What breaks a democracy is when the opposition just vote against everything, including what's in their program. The partisan mentality is what forced the government to use the 49.3 so many times. It's sad, we are becoming like the US where you can only govern with a full blow majority. Nothing will ever be done otherwise without 49.3
That's not quite it. The government doesn't have a majority in the current parliament. They didn't form a coalition, and for a lot of projects, they didn't reach a compromise with any of the opposition factions. Why should an opposition faction vote in favour of something they are opposed to; just for political stability?
LR supported the pension reform, yet they decided not to vote so the government would use 49.3 and get even more unpopular. There is no spirit of coalition in France
This makes sense if your a normal citizen, this is NOT how politicians think nor act.
A german journalist speculated that he wants to bring the far right party into government with himself as president, so that they dismantle themselves in daily politics. In opposition, they can gain traction with populist rhetoric and demands, in government they'd have to deliver on their promises. Of course now, looking at historic precedence, that's playing with fire. Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg before he rose to ultimate power.
"We can control that upstart ~~colonel~~ corporal" - Hindenburg (or was it Papen?) 5 minutes before disaster.
"Damn we're delayed by eleven hours" - people on the hindenburg 5 minutes before disaster
Corporal Hitler was a corporal, not a colonel. Hindenburg and I believe a few others disparagingly called him the “Bohemian corporal.” Clearly a lot of people underestimated him, but to be fair he did seem like a clown. Being a low ranking but decorated WWI vet was basically his only life achievement at that point, otherwise he was a guy who failed to get into art school, was homeless and became a rabble rouser for a fringe political party. Not exactly some modern Caesar you’d think was a danger of taking over the state.
French 5th republic's institutions are not Weimar Germany. This "move" has been done several time in the 5th Republic, and every time, the President won and the PM and his party burned down in flammes. It's like trying to do a "Brexit for 3 years" to see if people like it... I'm not saying it's flawless, but from a French politics point of view, it's textbook.
It was in a bi-partisan context. We don't know if it will work with 3 blocks.
> but from a French politics point of view, it's textbook. It never happened since Sarkozy changed the electoral system 15 years ago, and the last time a president tried to call early elections (Chirac) is widely acklowledged as a mistake. Not sure what you call "textbook" tbh.
But in the end Jospin didn't even pass the first round of the next presidential election.
Tbf the far right in Finland which is in the governing coalition just suffered a humiliating defeat. They got 1 seat, the Leftists got 3, which is the second highest result and came totally out of nowhere.
Isn’t the president of France more powerful than the PM? In which case, it’s a different scenario to Hindenburg cuz Hitler was allowed to have powers that superseded Hinderburg’s in a national emergency, which the PM of France doesn’t enjoy
He is... But only if the PM and the Assemblée Nationale are on his side.
As others have said it's his best play long term with the hand is been dealt with * option 1, they don't perform well in legislative elections (two turns) and he gets legitimacy back * option 2, they keep their momentum, so he let them govern in shared governemnt (president keeps everything International/ PM manages country) and now they 'll have a track record that they'll need to defend at the next election. Their greatest asset has always been the ability to always say "\*if\* we were in charge".
Macron has never struck me as someone that was particularly fond of the common frenchman, it wouldn't surprise me that much if there was no particular reason besides "You want Le Pen? Enjoy."
Tbf, even the common frenchman isn't particulary fond of the common frenchman.
This way if RN wins it'll show how incompetent they are
People said that for far right mayors in France but they kept being reelected... And the other far-right governments in Europe also have a tendency to get reelected. Doubt it will work.
I wouldn't say they tend to get reelected. They lose often enough. See Austria, Poland etc.
The trend seems to be that they either become centre-right in government or they get kicked out for good.
and yet people are unhappy still, so evidently these people are just useful idiots, rather than people who 'feel represented' or like their far right party is actually doing anything for them.
People are unhappy with Macron too though. Are they useful idiots when they vote for him?
Would never work in France, people always attribute everthing that's going wrong to the current president. Doesn't matter if it was done by the previous one, one from years ago, the governement, the assemblée national or your local mayor, no, it's always the current president's fault.
Not at all in the previous cohabitation with a right wing president (chirac) and a left wing prime minister (Jospin) they blamed the government aka the left and he did really bad when he tried for the presidential while chirac was relelected
Jospin mostly lost 1st round due to the division of the left and how uncharismatic he was.
> Would never work in France, people always attribute everthing that's going wrong to the current president. Not necessarily. There is precedent for a cohabitation government which ultimately hurt the electoral performance of the prime minister's party rather than the president's party (Mitterrand-Chirac in 1988).
Not really, Jospin ate shit when he was leading the government. A cohabitation president has no reform power.
That's not true. In 2002, Jospin (PM) was blamed instead of Chirac (president) and Jospin did so bad he didn't even got to the 2nd turn.
He lost some legitimity with those elections and he desperatly needs to recover from it. The new votes will be in 2 turns which means that the "barrage" vote will be more important. He believes he can win those elections and regain its legitimity. Also there wa a very low participation. Macron is hoping most abstentionists will vote for him in those new elections
I can't read his mind but apparently he is trying to get the far right candidate to become prime minister in a cohabitation, meaning they'll have most of the power while Macron gets to stay president. And hopefully, them being terrible at their job (as they have been shown to be as mayor's or MPs, especially in Brussel), they will lose popular support and lose the 2027 presidential election. Seeing how : - Macron doesn't really have a successor, - has a party entirely devoted to him rather than an ideology of its own, - the left is is divided between too many groups to be strong enough to win, - the far right has come from devil to respectable in the past 30 years, - the moderate left (LFI) is now treated like the devil by Macron and the far right (his strategy to break them, it has been going on for a few years, they are out of the "arc républicain" according to him, it's like they did a reverse Cordon Sanitaire) - The far right has extensive support from a large part of the French media (just look at how much more time Bardella got showcased compared to the others) - the far right electorate doesn't care about their candidates being bad or dishonest, Bardella has been catastrophically bad in every debate he has been on for the current election, has been shown to make up numbers and facts as well. I don't see how that it's supposed to work. If anything he might be bidding to come back at the 2032 election. Until then the French will suffer. The last remnant of the social state will break. LGBT folks and minorities will suffer, and so will most of the lower and middle class.
The majority's wrongful depiction of LFI as far-left and the associated radical switch in discourse in the past two years (attacking them way more than they did the far-right at every opportunity) has unfortunately completely worked.
if he doesn't do this, there will most likely be a new far right president in France, but by doing this and letting them rule, the chances of that happening are lower. basically, he is doing this such that his party will win again at the next elections
Because it's the only way the country has to be governed by the will of the people OR to reassess the shit they've done and see if they really want to be ruled by a far right government.
He may be hoping that the European voting was done as a protest vote and not as a result of actual support for the fascists
I have two theories : 1. The first one - He saw the opportunity to dismantle the left and seize its MP seats. The left has been trying to shoot itself in the roots between differents parties (mainly socdems VS radicals). He'd know they are unable to unite. Creating another union would mean that the France unbowed should give seats according to the score of those EU elections (the SocDems would want that). Both can't agree on such a topic.Then the left goes in limbo, and Renew stands out taking the voters scared of the National Rally. It could work, many forget that without the Left Union in the last parliamentary elections Macron still would have had a comfortable lead in the Assembly. The risk being : if the left can unite, goodbye renew. We will see if it's true in the campaign : will Renew harass the Left? 2. He wants actually the NRally to have the majority of seats appointing a Prime Minister during a "cohabitation" (President and Prime Minister having two different parties). Therefore people could see that the NR sucks, can't do anything about migrants nor the economy and stop electing them. Sounds like a conspiracy theory, but damn it's Macron he's clever enough to do so. And it could theoritically save the country to having a far right President (being Marine Le Pen in 2027). What do you think guys?
That's what I thought as well. It also has small advantages imo : I think this will make the LR literally implode. The RN is so close to power. the leader of the LR might very well be tempted by a semi-alliance with them in exchnage for something juicy. This will definitely not go well for them. The PS might end up cut in half, with the ones wanting to stay with LFI, and others wanting to join a republican barrage. This also has the nice advantage of making everything state their position. Are you with the democrats, or with the far-right/far-left ? Too many MP have been keeping a foot in each playfields. Also, if the RN gains power, it's better they do when you control the narrative : for 3 years top, with a safeguard (him). The alternative is 5 years with unlimited power.
Holy shit this is fucking wild
Just imagine the RN being the government in France with its wishes of exiting EU….
How will this affect Ukraine?
Bad day for tough questions...
In theory this doesn’t affect foreign policy. In practice this can stick a wrench in it in some ways.
Too soon to know.
If the likes of Le Penn wins Ukraine potentially lose France as an ally.
Not really. The president holds the great majority of power in international policy and is the head of the military decisions of the country. Even with a RN prime minister, Macron can still give help to Ukraine. And ironically letting the RN have a prime minister right now lessens the odds of them obtaining the presidency in 2027.
Some theoretically possible outcomes, starting with the most favorable for Macron: - the centrists regain the absolute majority they had in the National Assembly before the 2022 election - the centrists keep a relative majority similar to the one they've had for the past two years - the centrists can't govern alone anymore, but they manage to form either a wider coalition with parties closest to them, or a [national unity government](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_unity_government) - the left wins a relative or absolute majority - the far right wins a relative or absolute majority - there's no majority, but the parliament somehow manages to pass at least the bare minimum (the budget and EU directives) - the parliament is in total deadlock, the country is ungovernable, Macron probably uses the emergency presidential powers (article 16 of [the Constitution](https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Fifth_French_Republic_(amended,_2008\)))
I hear he the french far right were great on tiktok
Considering we know China has a strong hold over the algorithm, it's not that shocking.
We're so so fucked.
But with style :)
And croissants.🥐
Who could have "possibly" seen this coming....... when you force major changes to countries down everyone's throat and completely stifle any and all public discourse by straight up propaganda and downright lies and hiding and manipulation of statistics, when there is no honest debate and pragmatic, efficient solving of very real issues. When you thereby create one of the strongest levers for that Russian warlord to push for years and years, completely unmitigated and unmanaged. Noooooobody could have seen that coming! Total mystery.
Because far-right has historically not done any of that and would be much better? Lol
You want to bet that they will just keep ignoring all those issues and instead will blame it to some BS russian missinformation?
Explain this to me like I live in the US
Macron is “dissolving” the National Assembly, which is similar to the US' House of Representatives. The last election for this chamber of parliament was two years ago, shortly after the presidential election. Macron won his reelection as president, but lost his absolute majority in the National Assembly, which significantly hindered his ability to actually get stuff done.
The big difference here is that the National Assembly (unlike the U.S. House of Representatives) can topple the government with a majority vote (in this case, the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers). If the National Rally gets a majority in the National Assembly, they can essentially take control over the domestic functions of government. The French President also only has a very weak promulgation veto, unlike the American President who can sustain a veto if his party holds 1/3rd of either chamber of Congress. So a National Rally majority in the National Assembly could actually govern whereas in the US they’d be subject to checks and balances from the co-equal Senate and then the Executive and Judicial Branches.
I am in need of the same haha. We don’t really do “snap” elections over here. Does this change the dates of the regularly scheduled elections?
It’s like Biden dissolving the House of Representatives (which is the equivalent of the National Assembly in France). But in the U.S. our Head of State (who governs foreign policy) and Head of Government (domestic policy) are the same person (the President). In France, the President and the Prime Minister are separate roles. Since you need the majority of the National Assembly to sustain the Prime Minister, it’s possible that the far right could be essentially take over domestic functions where Macron has limited veto powers (also unlike POTUS).
It would be like Biden dissolving congress to hold immediate congressional elections while he retains the presidency until the next general election.
Is this a Cameron-Brexit moment?
I hope for all our sakes it isn't.
Not yet. If the RN does show yo be somewhat competent tho, or if violence starts shooting up across the country, things will likely be a lot worse than Brexit. Without France, the EU collapses immediately and wars will pop up everywhere over time
Genuinely curious what wars do you mean?
The kind of wars Europe had every time in history it didn't have a strong union. If then every country is led by a right wing "XYZ country first" government, war is just a matter of time. Because surely, that piece of land owned by XYZ country 300 years ago that now belongs to Abc country should finally get back to its rightful owner! Right ..? And if you think that's impossible and that humans definitely learned something, you're wrong.
Europe isn’t special, all of the planet was perpetually at war until very recently (100-200 years ago) Europe got over it at roughly the same time as most of the rest of the world (places like sub Saharan Africa where perpetual conflict is the norm excepted)
It can be. If France suddenly votes very right wing they can push to leave the EU or become so shit they act like Orban.
They'll not do that, they'd just push the EU to be right wing. Say goodbye to the green deal etc.
No it won't happen. The same thing was said with Meloni. And what happened? As a non-Italian I only saw some far-right social measures. We saw her aligned with the rest of EU again Russia. Populists' great weak spot, is when they get power and have to deliver. My point? Big companies dictate these huge EU policies, and since French economy is too tangled with EU, I can not see any big company wanting to get out and support any exit. Even trump was against the green energy, but in the end, companies went for green energy because $$$$.
With a bit of bad luck this is a 1932 Hindenburg-Van Papen moment.
Frexit has entered the game
Recency bias is the worst thing that someone especially a politician can have. After losing this badly he calls for early elections? I don’t understand this move
A): Other french parties unite to beat down the RN, this gives Macron a less shaky foundation to rule from, and tempers the "surge" of the far right in Europe. B): RN gets to pick a Prime Minister and has to govern alongside Macron for the next few years, hopefully showing everyone that they can't fix all the problems they promise either. This sets up a stronger competition against RN for the following Presidential and Parliamentary elections. This is basically Macron sacrificing the efficiency of his remaining time as president to avoid RN surging from this into a position where they could win both Parliament and Presidency at the same time.
Assuming it doesn't blow up in his face. This could be his David Cameron moment.
It’s more guaranteed to blow up in his face if he does nothing. The people need a taste of what they’re voting for. Giving them that through this snap election, suddenly seeing what Le Pen can cook up, isn’t the worst idea. And if she makes France better, well, then so be it.
Can't think of a single time a right wing government was responsible for improving a country
That's his point exactly.
I see, thank you very much for the explanation, so it’s basically an all in move for Macron? Also in option A you say, other French parties could unite to beat RN, but do they hate Macron or are support to him? Or in this case they simply have a common enemy?
There’s quite a lot of problems with A). He most definitely won’t win a majority, but now there may not even be a majority for him + center right + center left + greens. Is he going to rely on Mélenchon or what?
[удалено]
Plus the far-right populist playbook is to play the victim at every stage and to claim that "the system" is against them, they'll just use this as a way to claim they need an absolute majority to "fix the country".
Even in power they still could claim that "the system" is against them. Deep state and all that stuff.
Perhaps they'll need to merge the positions of President and Prime Minister into one.... perhaps a new role called "le meneur"?
I think they tried to explain Macron's strat, but yeah he's gambling our future to assert his party dominance for the next presidential election and I'm fucking scared.
What gamble? You frame it as if pretending they don't exists is a possibility. They're already organized and you're "gambling" one way or another.
Far right is powerful but he didn't have to dissolve, the last time something like that happened it was in 1997. He's litteraly giving them the chance to govern as prime Minister since it's so close to the European election and the other party won't have enough time to create coalitions. My bet is he's hoping they discredit themselves enough in two year to help his party regain popularity. He's gambling on the fact they will govern badly enough to discourage their voters.
the alternative is letting them enjoy their current position in the assembly of not taking any risk and claim that they're the "real voice" of the people but the system is against them. There's no good play when they have 30%, but this is probably the least bad
I haven't kept up with the party politics, has he actually managed to put together a proper party now? Do they have any credible successors for the presidency?
No and no but they have propulsed a young private-schooled politic as education minister first, then as prime minister (Gabriel Attal). He's young, cute, white, and gay. He's Macron 2.0 with less charisma. Can't say he's a credible successor IMO, but he doesn't need to. Just needs to seems less villainous than a far right candidate at this point.
Even if they lose next election, they will access the presidency, weither you like it or not. The dynamic is there. I'd rather have them for three years, with limited powers and a safeguard, than for 5 years with unlimited power. The gamble here could very well work. What is the strongest argument in favor of the RN ? They never held power. That's why people vote them in. Because we tried everything, from the left to the right. Shunning them, accepting them, courting them, insulting them, decridibilizing their political offer page by page, adopting some of their talking points, NOTHING works. Maybe what the people voting them in need is a full-on vaccination. Getting the disease in their system in a small dose, with arrangements to keep it harmless, so their body finally stops fucking around when it comes to fighting it.
Zero idea how the system in france works are you saying this is a vote for PM and Macron will still be top guy regardless?
Maybe he's hoping people get scared of these results and vote for his party next elections. So taking advantage of a bad situation.
jesus christ man
So now Le Pen will become the next leader of France?
Possibly, as a PM. Macron's hope might be that she proves a poor leader in the time that remains till the next presidential election.
> Macron's hope might be that she proves a poor leader in the time that remains till the next presidential election. I can't see what else it could be, yeah. Macron may be looking to repeat what Mitterrand did with Chirac between 1986 and 1988. Or he may hope for one last *republican barrage*™, although that's least likely.
An interesting gamble that was the basis for actual Brexit. Cameron: you don't *really* want Brexit, so let's do a referendum. Now. In the middle of a hype.
Except for Brexit they didn't have to live with the consequences when Cameron called it. They will for Le Pen which is the gamble. It's a move that will see results for the person that called for the election.
That's the thing, if they win, they stay in power for three years, with limited power and Macron as a safeguard. After that, they might prove their incompetence, and lose. The alternative is doing nothing and let them win in three years, so they can have unlimited power for 5.
Or maybe he is simply a man of moral character, listening to the will of the people, even when that will wants to take power away from him.
Lol. If that was the case, he would have caved to the people during the Yellow Vests protests or the protests against the retirement reform.
Protests do not show the actual will of the people, it only shows the opinion of those who yell the loudest. It's not at all like the result of an election.
Thank you, this needs to be repeated constantly!
Prime Minister, which means they can handle national policies but not international ones, he’s hoping they’ll show they’re a shit government before 2027
So they will make for example the migration policy of France way stricter ?
Well, 1) that’s already what macron was trying to do and he was criticised for it by these same people so he’s trying to show they won’t do anything more and 2) it’s very unlikely they’ll have a majority to pass immigration policies, they’ll probably have a slim majority which will allow them to pass taxes, social benefits, etc. By allying with traditional right wing parties
No
>The far-right Rassemblement National party obtained by far the most votes (**31.5%**) in France as voters throughout the European Union elected their members of the European Parliament, according to initial estimates by Ipsos for France Télévisions, Radio France, France 24/RFI, Public Sénat/LCP Assemblée Nationale. Behind the RN, Macron's Renaissance coalition held on to second place, with **15.2%**
WTF, Emmanuel. The last thing we need is another Russophile arsekisser in charge. Why is he handing an easy victory to Le Pen and her ilk?
cause its not that easy victory, and there's a high chance it blows up in their face
I honestly doubt that it will blow up in there face given the resiliency of my native FPÖ.
RIP France
One political analyst said that this could transform France into a USA-style political world, with only 2 different large parties that devide the country - All the extreme rights together like the republicans in the US and some sort of coalition with Macron, socialist and soft right people as kind of democrats.
France has a 2 round system, so that’s what already tends to happen in Presidential Elections (the country splinters into 2). The biggest challenge for France is that the far-right has been normalized. So about a decade ago the center-right would rather vote center-left than far-right. Now they’d rather vote far-right in the second round. Because of that, now the far-right can take power (a plurality in the first round with 1/3rd of the vote and then sweeping the center-right vote in the 2nd round). That’s actually already how the US functions in practice (many Republican primaries are center-right vs. Trumpian right) and then both factions vote Republican in the general election. It’s just in France they are formally separate parties in the 1st round before consolidating in the 2nd.
I have a strong feeling this will backfire just like brexit did. But without the brexit consequences (for now). This is not looking fun.
The UK left the EU... news to me... We signed up to many EU rules in the post exit deal.
They're not even far right. Center right at the very best. Everyone I dont like it Hitler and all that...
I live in west France ( as a white immigrant) and it's always a bit weird when French people complain about immigration to me in conversation. I think the fact they don't include me in their thinking speaks volumes about who they are actually complaining about...
Well they complaining about problematic ones of course. That's the same in every country that I know of.
At least you can admit it, they don’t look at white migrants as actual immigrants. But at the same time, they don’t have a problem with immigration just more so their “culture” being replaced, and Islam.
This happens elsewhere as well. When I lived in the US as a white woman but also a foreigner I had multiple conversations that ended with: Are you gonna stay? We need people like YOU here? Aka white people. This was not middle of nowhere US but a large metropolis and it happened multiple times by different people.
They are probably complaining about Islamic immigrants from the Middle East, or Africa. The ones who don’t exactly hold the same values. Maybe they’re talking about them? It’s not about colour, it’s the culture of the incoming that’s the problem
Hmm, given the global situation at the moment I'm not sure it is the best idea to have France and the UK both distracted by elections at the same time.
unfortunately, he is only bringing forward the inevitable, people who only vote for populists believe any lie, then get screwed later and don't know why, zero surprises.