What's Left?
The final election this week, was the only one I actually voted in. The French Presidential elections. In the first round I risked voting for the Green candiate, despite the risk that the least worst big candidate (Royale) might not make it to the second round. However this did not happen. She got through. However, I had a sinking feeling as soon as the first round results came in, Royale was already 5% behind Sarkozy, not boding well for the second round. And despite my hopes being raised, with Royale and beaten centrist candidate Bayrou talking to each other, and opinion polls narrowing, they were eventually dashed last night, as news came in that Sarkozy had won with around 53% of the vote.
If truth be told, with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight vision, Royale had already lost the election months ago. Her gaffes mainly in foreign policy) at the start of the campaign (China has a good justice system, declaring her support for Quebec independence, and being done by satirical pranksters), meant she lost a lot of credibility. She seemed lightweight and, frankly uninformed. Yes a more experienced socialist candidate would not have made those mistakes, but frankly a more experienced socialist candidate (the old male dinosaurs) would not have even come close to touching Sarkozy, with a possible repeat of 2002, when socialist candidate Lionel Jospin failing to make it to the second round. No this election was lost because of the lack of ooomph from Royale, no real impact point.
One could also argue that the election was lost because France is going the way of other countries, following the drift rightwards. France still has a large state sector, and has not totally embraced the neo-liberal ideal. This will now change with Sarkozy, with his pledges of making the French work harder and so forth. Neo-liberalism; that everything can and will be solved through the market, with very little state intervention. I disagree with that view, for me it smacks too much of law of the jungle, survival of the fittest. I was proud of the fact France was ever so slightly different, that there was a very strong social conscience. Don't get me wrong France was not some socialist paradise, and had already been starting to follow its European neighbours in a drift rightwards, but there was still something different. A survey reported on the bbc news website apparently suggested that 60% of French distrust the unfettered free market, and large multinational firms!
Why in view of this, did Sarkozy get elected? Well maybe because people were that unimpressed by Royale's gaffes that they would vote Sarkozy because he seemed more firm and experienced. Or it could be that the fact that so many people believe that change is needed in France, that people would vote for radical change, even if it was radical change the other way so to speak.
And here we come to the crux of the matter. The reason for the rightward drift in many if not all western countries, is because there was a percieved problem with the status quo, and the right are the ones who appear to have the radical solutions. While the centre-left didn't seem to be persuing any equivalent left-wing radical policies, they were forced to follow the right-wing drift as well, and to conform to the neo-liberal mainstream. What the left, or more accurately, those of us with a strong social conscience need, is an idea just as radical to counter the right. An alternative vision of the future needs to be offered. We need a radical alternative to corporate capitalism without resorting to socialist dogma.
In the meantime, with Europe swinging on the right, all that is left for me is to set-up an anarchist commune on some Mediterranean Island. Anyone want to join?
If truth be told, with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight vision, Royale had already lost the election months ago. Her gaffes mainly in foreign policy) at the start of the campaign (China has a good justice system, declaring her support for Quebec independence, and being done by satirical pranksters), meant she lost a lot of credibility. She seemed lightweight and, frankly uninformed. Yes a more experienced socialist candidate would not have made those mistakes, but frankly a more experienced socialist candidate (the old male dinosaurs) would not have even come close to touching Sarkozy, with a possible repeat of 2002, when socialist candidate Lionel Jospin failing to make it to the second round. No this election was lost because of the lack of ooomph from Royale, no real impact point.
One could also argue that the election was lost because France is going the way of other countries, following the drift rightwards. France still has a large state sector, and has not totally embraced the neo-liberal ideal. This will now change with Sarkozy, with his pledges of making the French work harder and so forth. Neo-liberalism; that everything can and will be solved through the market, with very little state intervention. I disagree with that view, for me it smacks too much of law of the jungle, survival of the fittest. I was proud of the fact France was ever so slightly different, that there was a very strong social conscience. Don't get me wrong France was not some socialist paradise, and had already been starting to follow its European neighbours in a drift rightwards, but there was still something different. A survey reported on the bbc news website apparently suggested that 60% of French distrust the unfettered free market, and large multinational firms!
Why in view of this, did Sarkozy get elected? Well maybe because people were that unimpressed by Royale's gaffes that they would vote Sarkozy because he seemed more firm and experienced. Or it could be that the fact that so many people believe that change is needed in France, that people would vote for radical change, even if it was radical change the other way so to speak.
And here we come to the crux of the matter. The reason for the rightward drift in many if not all western countries, is because there was a percieved problem with the status quo, and the right are the ones who appear to have the radical solutions. While the centre-left didn't seem to be persuing any equivalent left-wing radical policies, they were forced to follow the right-wing drift as well, and to conform to the neo-liberal mainstream. What the left, or more accurately, those of us with a strong social conscience need, is an idea just as radical to counter the right. An alternative vision of the future needs to be offered. We need a radical alternative to corporate capitalism without resorting to socialist dogma.
In the meantime, with Europe swinging on the right, all that is left for me is to set-up an anarchist commune on some Mediterranean Island. Anyone want to join?
posted by Julien at 23:27
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home