One puzzling and often overlooked feature of the France that elected Nicolas Sarkozy as its new president, and that is now poised to give his political allies a powerful parliamentary mandate, is its mix of private optimism and public pessimism.
Consider this: France has the highest fertility rate in the EU (just under two children per woman), even ahead of booming Ireland. Of course, that rate alone is not enough to sustain France's current population, but it's far stronger than its European neighbors and almost equal to that of the US.
Yet, despite this, Eurobarometer polls repeatedly show that the French are the most pessimistic of all Europeans when it comes to their country's future. How can it be that people who are so negative about their common future as a nation go about confidently building their private futures within their families?
Indeed, strained by decades of governmental failure to curb massive unemployment, the French are nowadays often perceived as having retired from the political sphere to concentrate on their lives and leisure. Museums, gardening, clubs of all sorts are blossoming in today's France. Private associations, it seems, have picked up where political parties and trade unions have left off.
But if the French have turned their backs on the public sphere, how are we to make sense of the record-high participation in the recent presidential election, when more than 85 percent turned out to vote in both rounds? How do we explain the passion aroused by the campaign and by Sarkozy himself, including the massive affirmation he received in the parliamentary election?
Political fervor, it seems, has not vanished in the land of Rousseau and Danton. So the truth must lie elsewhere: The French are not hopeless about politics; they are simply waiting for a genuine leader.
As a matter of fact, a case can be made that the French will never come to believe that the state lacks power -- globalization or no globalization. The French still expect greater things from their government than from an integrated Europe or the boundless world.
Yes, the French are incorrigible lovers of the welfare state (they are not the only ones). And Sarkozy seems to understand this instinctively. His agenda appears to aim at domestic liberalization -- moving beyond the 35-hour working week, ending the special pension regimes accorded to particular professions, increasing incentives to work and gain wealth. But it also seeks protection from the dizzying effects of globalization, which probably will mean strong support for the EU's Common Agricultural Policy, skepticism toward further trade liberalization and the will to improve the EU's economic government.
Nevertheless, precisely because they care about the future of their numerous children, the French are much more amenable to some wise reforms than most commentators (and politicians) generally assume. Secondary and higher education are rightly near the top of the agenda of the new government. But so are measures aimed at harnessing the state to efforts to encourage entrepreneurship and boost economic dynamism such as public guaranties for housing and start-ups, and fiscal rebate for investment in small enterprises.
France is also in desperate need of a reality check on the nature of its current cultural diversity. And no one should forget that, despite his campaign rhetoric and his apparent unpopularity with many immigrants, Sarkozy himself is an immigrant's son who favors bold affirmative action policies. Besides, the nomination of a woman with a North African accent as justice minister made that clear from the start.
Most French understand that their public spaces -- the labor market, the workplace, housing and educational institutions -- are corroded by discrimination. France's impoverished suburbs, the notorious banlieues or suburbs, make the ideal of "fraternite" sound like an insult added to injury. There is no greater task for Sarkozy than to open, from the inside, all doors to the offspring of others who, like his father, immigrated to France.
So make no mistake about it. Sarkozy has not been elected to adapt France to an elusive globalization. His mandate is much more demanding: He must reconcile France's public interests with its private passions.
Jean-Paul Fitoussi is professor of economics at sciences-po (Paris Institute of Political Studies) and president of Observatoire francais des conjonctures economiques in Paris. Eloi Laurent is a senior research fellow at the latter institution.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US