For
centuries, the “left” hoped popular movements would lead to
changes for the better. Today, many leftists seem terrified of
popular movements for change, convinced “populism” must lead to
“fascism.” But it needn’t be so, says Diana Johnstone.
by
Diana Johnstone
Part
5 - The Weakness of Macron
The
Yellow Vests have made clear to the whole world that Emmanuel Macron
was an artificial product sold to the electorate by an extraordinary
media campaign.
Macron
was the rabbit magically pulled out of a top hat, sponsored by what
must be called the French oligarchy. After catching the eye of
established king-maker Jacques Attali, the young Macron was given a
stint at the Rothschild bank where he could quickly gain a small
fortune, ensuring his class loyalty to his sponsors. Media saturation
and the scare campaign against “fascist” Marine LePen (who
moreover flubbed her major debate) put Macron in office. He had met
his wife when she was teaching his theater class, and now he gets to
play President.
The
mission assigned to him by his sponsors was clear. He must carry
through more vigorously the “reforms” (austerity measures)
already undertaken by previous governments, which had often dawdled
at hastening the decline of the social State.
And
beyond that, Macron was supposed to “save Europe”. Saving Europe
means saving the European Union from the quagmire in which it finds
itself.
This is
why cutting expenses and balancing the budget is his obsession.
Because that’s what he was chosen to do by the oligarchy that
sponsored his candidacy. He was chosen by the financial oligarchy
above all to save the European Union from threatening disintegration
caused by the euro. The treaties establishing the EU and above all
the common currency, the euro, have created an imbalance between
member states that is unsustainable. The irony is that previous
French governments, starting with Mitterrand, are largely responsible
for this state of affairs. In a desperate and technically
ill-examined effort to keep newly unified Germany from becoming the
dominant power in Europe, the French insisted on binding Germany to
France by a common currency. Reluctantly, the Germans agreed to the
euro – but only on German terms. The result is that Germany has
become the unwilling creditor of equally unwilling EU member states,
Italy, Spain, Portugal and of course, ruined Greece. The financial
gap between Germany and its southern neighbors keeps expanding, which
causes ill will on all sides.
Germany
doesn’t want to share economic power with states it considers
irresponsible spendthrifts. So Macron’s mission is to show Germany
that France, despite its flagging economy, is “responsible”, by
squeezing the population in order to pay interest on the debt.
Macron’s idea is that the politicians in Berlin and the bankers in
Frankfurt will be so impressed that they will turn around and say,
well done Emmanuel, we are ready to throw our wealth into a common
pot for the benefit of all 27 Member States. And that is why Macron
will stop at nothing to balance the budget, to make the Germans love
him.
So far,
the Macron magic is not working on the Germans, and it’s driving
his own people into the streets.
Or are
they his own people? Does Macron really care about his run of the
mill compatriots who just work for a living? The consensus is that he
does not.
Macron
is losing the support both of the people in the streets and the
oligarchs who sponsored him. He is not getting the job done.
Macron’s
rabbit-out-of-the hat political ascension leaves him with little
legitimacy, once the glow of glossy magazine covers wears off. With
help from his friends, Macron invented his own party, La République
en Marche, which doesn’t mean much of anything but suggested
action. He peopled his party with individuals from “civil society”,
often medium entrepreneurs with no political experience, plus a few
defectors from either the Socialist or the Republican Parties, to
occupy the most important government posts.
The only
well-known recruit from “civil society” was the popular
environmental activist, Nicolas Hulot, who was given the post of
Minister of Environment, but who abruptly resigned in a radio
announcement last August, citing frustration.
Macron’s
strongest supporter from the political class was Gérard Collomb,
Socialist Mayor of Lyons, who was given the top cabinet post of
Minister of Interior, in charge of national police. But shortly after
Hulot left, Collomb said he was leaving too, to go back to Lyons.
Macron entreated him to stay on, but on October 3, Collomb went ahead
and resigned, with a stunning statement referring to “immense
problems” facing his successor. In the “difficult neighborhoods”
in the suburbs of major cities, he said, the situation is “very
much degraded : it’s the law of the jungle that rules, drug dealers
and radical Islamists have taken the place of the Republic.” Such
suburbs need to be “reconquered”.
After
such a job description, Macron was at a loss to recruit a new
Interior Minister. He groped around and came up with a crony he had
chosen to head his party, ex-Socialist Christophe Castaner. With a
degree in criminology, Castaner’s main experience qualifying him to
head the national police is his close connection, back in his youth
in the 1970s, with a Marseilles Mafioso, apparently due to his
penchant for playing poker and drinking whiskey in illegal dens.
Saturday,
November 17, demonstrators were peaceful, but resented the heavy
teargas attacks. Saturday November 25, things got a big rougher, and
on Saturday December 1st, all hell broke loose. With no leaders and
no service d’ordre (militants assigned to protect the demonstrators
from attacks, provocations and infiltration), it was inevitable that
casseurs (smashers) got into the act and started smashing things,
looting shops and setting fires to trash cans, cars and even
buildings. Not only in Paris, but all over France: from Marseilles to
Brest, from Toulouse to Strasbourg. In the remote town of Puy en
Velay, known for its chapel perched on a rock and its traditional
lace-making, the Prefecture (national government authority) was set
on fire. Tourist arrivals are cancelled and fancy restaurants are
empty and department stores fear for their Christmas windows. The
economic damages are enormous.
And yet,
support for the Yellow Vests remains high, probably because people
are able to distinguish between those grieved citizens and the
vandals who love to wreak destruction for its own sake.
On
Monday, there were suddenly fresh riots in the troubled suburbs that
Collomb warned about as he retreated to Lyons. This was a new front
for the national police, whose representatives let it be known that
all this was getting to be much too much for them to cope with.
Announcing a state of emergency is not likely to solve anything.
Macron
is a bubble that has burst. The legitimacy of his authority is very
much in question. Yet he was elected in 2017 for a five year term,
and his party holds a large majority in parliament that makes his
destitution almost impossible.
So what
next? Despite having been sidelined by Macron’s electoral victory
in 2017, politicians of all hews are trying to recuperate the
movement – but discreetly, because the Gilets Jaunes have made
clear their distrust of all politicians. This is not a movement that
seeks to take power. It simply seeks redress of its grievances. The
government should have listened in the first place, accepted
discussions and compromise. This gets more difficult as time goes on,
but nothing is impossible.
For some
two or three hundred years, people one could call “left” hoped
that popular movements would lead to changes for the better. Today,
many leftists seem terrified of popular movements for change,
convinced “populism” must lead to “fascism”. This attitude is
one of many factors indicating that the changes ahead will not be led
by the left as it exists today. Those who fear change will not be
there to help make it happen. But change is inevitable and it need
not be for the worse.
***
Source:
Comments
Post a Comment