On the cover of the French magazine Philosophie, the two leading contenders in France’s upcoming presidential election, incumbent French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Socialist presidential candidate Francois Hollande, are depicted dressed up as philosophers Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
“The real presidential contest,” according to the magazine, pits the consensual and contractual vision of Rousseau (Hollande) against the violent “every man is a wolf to his fellow man” vision of Hobbes (Sarkozy).
Philospophie’s take on the French presidential election may contain some truth, but the reality is far more prosaic — and far less intellectual. To understand the complexities of the race and Sarkozy’s recent (but still relative) surge, sports might be a better reference point than philosophy.
Consider Hollande’s strategy in soccer terms. Having scored early by establishing a lead in the opinion polls, he has found himself in the position of an Italian coach practicing the catenaccio tactics of 20 years ago — a purely defensive strategy to keep Sarkozy from coming back.
It might work, but it has also contributed to the tedium of Hollande’s campaign and the growing lack of enthusiasm for him as a person.
Hollande wanted so much to stress his “normality” compared with the excesses of Sarkozy’s character that he ended up appearing banal. As a result, he has found himself hemmed in by the crypto-revolutionary aura of far-left candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon and Sarkozy’s hyper-energetic dynamism.
Mohammed Merah’s killing spree in Toulouse last month also worked in favor of Sarkozy, who has been happy to shift the electoral debate from social injustice to security issues. However, even if Sarkozy looks stronger now than he did at the beginning of the election campaign, the challenges he faces remain formidable and may be impossible to overcome.
Never in the history of the Fifth Republic has the same partisan majority won a presidential contest more than three times in succession. Sarkozy’s re-election, following his victory in 2007 and Jacques Chirac’s triumphs in 1995 and 2002, would mean a fourth consecutive victory for the Gaullist right, which would be all the more remarkable in view of the economic situation in France, Europe and the rest of the world.
Beyond these structural and historical factors, there is the issue of personalities.
In this regard, the contest is not so much between Hobbes and Rousseau, as between Napoleon Bonaparte and Clement Attlee, the famously dull post-war British prime minister, of whom former British prime minister Winston Churchill once said: “He has much to be modest about.”
In other words, the election may simply become a contest between a rejection of Sarkozy and a lack of passion for Hollande. As a result, abstention — usually remarkably low in French presidential elections — could play a major role.
In the meantime, regret can be sensed across the political spectrum.
“If only we could have a more presentable candidate than Sarkozy,” mumble conservatives.
“If only we could have a more charismatic candidate than Hollande,” comes the refrain from the other camp.
Ultimately, this campaign will prove remarkable for the lack of serious attention paid to the candidates’ policies.
The French perceive no real difference between an incumbent who has not kept his promises and a challenger whose promises are untenable. A suicidal denial of reality seems to unite the candidates and their supporters, which is best formulated as follows: “Don’t address serious issues, such as the national debt, during the election campaign and we will not expect you to confront them seriously when you are in power.”
Consider the recent cover of The Economist, which depicts Sarkozy and Hollande as the two male characters in Manet’s famous painting Dejeuner sur l’Herbe (Lunch on the Grass). Surrounded by naked women, they are supposed to illustrate the “French art of life” that France can no longer afford.
Where is Churchill and his call to arms, effort and sacrifice? Is France preparing to waste another five years, regardless of the election’s outcome?
Of course, in strong winds and high seas, the experience of the ship’s captain matters. Yet, given the problems of the French economy and the constraints of the EU, not to mention those of the world economy in a global age, no president will have much room to maneuver.
Dominique Moisi is the author of The Geopolitics of Emotion.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS