In all seriousness, I don't know enough about the French candidates. It's just my instinct. I see the division as between Thatcherite and Blairite approaches to economic reform. Do you want a savage beast, or a more gentle unifier? I think France needs a savage beast at the moment: I don't think Blair could have pushed through the reforms Thatcher made, in the climate of the time. Of course, the political system is also different. France doesn't give so much untrammelled power to the person at the top. But in the 70s Britain was supposed to be "ungovernable", just as now France is "ruled by the street". These things are not immutable.
Anyway, good luck to whoever wins. It would be great to have an economically dynamic France back in Europe, and I doubt that this will require destroying the welfare state.
but what about their respective stances on Turkey in the EU? combined with Sarko's comments on immigrants, he sounds most unsavoury.
ReplyDeletehe is unsavoury.
ReplyDeleteHere's a parable.In 1985 (I think) the Tories passed Section 28 of the (I think) Local Government Act:
"28. - 2A (1) A local authority shall not -
(a) intentionally promote homosexuality or publish material with the intention of promoting homosexuality;
(b) promote the teaching in any maintained school of the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship"
For a long time this was a touchstone issue for a lot of people, me included. It is a fairly evil law, although I don't think it ever had much effect. But it is typical of the Tory social agenda back then.
Point is: after 18 years of rule by these evil bigots, was England in 1997 more or less tolerant towards gays than in 1979? Transparently, much more. Why? Well... as Benjamin Friedman would tell you, economic growth does that.
One reason I am a Thatcher fan is that I decided a government's economic agenda is just more important than its social agenda. Governments can't really change what people think. But they can screw up the economy.
Conclusion: the problem with France is not that Nicholas Sarkozy calls the rioters in the suburbs "racaille" (by the way, I think you would find that many people in those same suburbs had the same opinion). The problem is that 20% or so of the French are voting for a fascist, neo-populist party, and the underlying reason is: their economy is screwed up, growth is low and people are fighting over dividing the cake. Sarkozy may be a nasty man, but his policies might fix that. I don't think Royal has the answers.
I would argue this may even extend to Turkey. It'll be a long process getting them in and in the end, it probably won't depend on one man. But it may well depend on the economic optimism of the French nation.
very thoughtful, and I can see that you make very good points. inevitably, i think of parallels with the political growth of the Hindu right in India (yes, I'm one). the trouble is that we nudge the boundaries of what is acceptable a little further every time. we can't change the way people think but we can have laws that at least genuflect towards equality.
ReplyDeletemuch saddened by the riots that broke out after the results - they don't help help themselves by doing this, do they?
No they don't, and Segolene Royal was very stupid to make those comments predicting trouble just before the election. Now they look like a self-fulfilling prophecy.
ReplyDelete