national front wins french elections

[RickRoll]

In wake of Paris attacks, etc.

[RickRoll]

sorry www.ft.com/cms/s/0/00371ad4-9c1a-11e5-b45d-4812f209f861.html

[claig]

It is a sign that the centre has been discredited and it is hapening all over Europe but more so in France. The puppetocracy is coming to an end in Europe and in America. The puppets will do everything they can to stop Le Pen, just as they will do to stop Trump, but if she wins, it is the end of the EU, the end of the climate change game and the end of political correctness.

[claig]

I think here we will get Boris as the next Prme Minister. Today he has gone against the puppets too. He is the only one of our politicians who can dare challenge the puppets.

[claig]

I don't thnk it is really about the attacks. The Front National has been growing over time and the discrediting of the centre has grown over time too. As Le Pen says, it is really about

"the bi-polarisation of French politics, with the nationalists on one side, and the globalists on the other"

All of the other parties and all of the EU are globalists in the pay of globalist bankers and corporations. Le Pen opposes them and that is why they are all against her.

[RickRoll]

FN was on the rise for a while, but the attacks will have helped.

[claig]

Yes, I agree, they will have made people think.

[OTheHugeManatee]

It's happening all over Europe. Populist parties on both the right and the left are on the rise and have been for some time. IMO there are a number of contributing factors, but the main impetus is a sort of inarticulate protest by people who feel 'left behind' by globalisation, at the ways in which globalisation is negatively impacting their lives. I'm talking about things like mass migration, outsourcing of blue-collar jobs, weakening of nation states in favour of regulation at the global level, the widening gap between rich and poor in many countries, the tottering state of social democracy as the welfare state Ponzi scheme starts to come unstuck.

The reaction of many is to look nostalgically backwards to a time when everything was peachy (Even if that time never actually existed) and then to try and reverse-engineer the imagined conditions of that time. IMO this doesn't really work. But I think there's a real problem in the failure of the elites driving (and benefiting from) globalisation to hear the objections coming from the masses. Ultimately refusal by the ruling class to accommodate the concerns of the people results in civil unrest and even revolution. We're not quite there yet but the widespread nature of public unhappiness with the direction of travel is very worrying.

My view is that globalisation is happening, whether we like it or not. But what we need is an open discussion about the best forms of social organisation to handle that, and to ensure the interests of ordinary people are taken into account given the huge impersonal forces of global change we face today. The elite viewpoint is that nation states are an obstacle to 'development', focusing as they do on the interests of a geography rather than transnational changes or agreements. This underlies the current trend toward neutering and even trying to dismantle nation states; popular resistance to it is demonised as 'populism' or 'racism', a narrow-minded, uneducated fixation on one nation as opposed to global concerns. But to me, from the point of view of the little guy, dismantling nation states is a major problem. Nation states define a community of interest based in a particular geography; without that definition, how can we have a meaningful electorate, voting for any but the vaguest policies? And without an electorate or proper policies, how can we have any kind of meaningful democracy? The utopian vision of world government looks downright creepy and totalitarian to me, and I'd prefer to keep things a bit messier and small-scale.

To my mind these are some of the issues that sit behind the rise of nationalist parties. Though I have concerns about the way these issues get dumbed down into 'bloody foreigners' or 'things ain't what they used to be' I think they have a voice that needs to be heard, as they point to a debate that is not being had and whose suppression will result in far worse unrest than we've seen yet.

[ppeatfruit]

Agree OTheHuge. Though in France the electoral system is such that when the 2nd round of elections comes more people vote and they are against the fascists. It happened last time.

[OTheHugeManatee]

I will be very surprised if Le Pen gets anywhere near actual government, at least this time round. But the anti-politics, anti-globalisation, populist trend is there across Europe. Pankaj Mishra argues, in a related theme, that the rise of ISIS is part of the same trend.

I think for most people the willingness to see globalised consumer capitalism as a Ponzi scheme is inversely proportional to how much you expect to gain from the system. That is to say, the more you are likely to get out of how things are, the less likely you are to see anything wrong with it. That's just human nature. The elites trying to merge the EU as a superstate have everything to gain from continuing as they are; the 50% of Spanish youth consigned to long-term joblessness may take a different view.

I think there's also a conflict between the elite view of communities, which sees them as random groupings of people within a specific geography, and that of most ordinary people who experience a nation or their own community as bound by ties of culture, tradition, interpersonal relations and shared practices. That leads to a situation where those in power think nothing of importing a million people from elsewhere - because we're short of workers and the birth rate is low, so why not? - and those on the ground who feel anxious and threatened by the sudden arrival of large numbers of people with whom they have no shared bonds of family relation, cultural practice or often even language. Then the latter view is demonised, again by the elites, as uneducated, ignorant, bigoted, racist when in fact it's quite rational on its own terms.

That's not to say one view is better than the other but trying to unpick the conflicting perspectives that help fuel the rise of parties like the Front National. There are major problems brewing and even though no populist party is anywhere near power - yet - I don't think the elites realise how serious this is or could become.

[claig]

Pankaj Mishra is wrong about Isis having anything to do with populist politics. Isis have been funded and aided by billionaire elites in order to overthrow sovereign nations and depose their leaders in an attempt to redraw the Middle East for the benefit of elites. Isis have no large-scale popular support and have ony attracted mercenary Jihadis and disaffected Islamists. Isis don't represent the majority of Muslims, they are not a popular movement unlike Le Pen's Front National which won close to 30% support in regional elections across France.

[OTheHugeManatee]

claig, have you read the article I linked? The argument is quite nuanced and a long way from your paraphrase above.

[claig]

I haven't read it, I have only read the headline

"Islamic State is often called ‘medieval’ but is in fact very modern – a horrific expression of a widespread frustration with a globalised western model that promises freedom and prosperity to all, but fails to deliver"

and that is enough to know that he is wrong. Isis are 'medieval', they aren't modern, they are an artificial construct funded by globalists to destroy sovereignty across the Middle East.

'a globalised western model that promises freedom and prosperity to all, but fails to deliver'

Isis are not a reaction to the promise of freedom and prosperity of the globalists, their DJ Jihadis threaten the freedoms of sovereign people. The populist politicians on the contrary oppose globalism and want to restore freedom and sovereignty.

[OTheHugeManatee]

OK then

[RickRoll]

There are 18 regions, and anyone who got 10% gets to go into the secound round (which happens unless one party reached 50%), but some will withdraw rather than go forward. Also candidates will represent one party but in each region have diverse parties supporting them (except FN, who stand alone)

The overall vote was:

United left: 23%
Green: 7%
Other left: 6%

Total left: 36%

United centre-right: 27%
Other centre-right: 5%

Total centre-right 32%

FN: 28%

Others: 4%

In 2010:
Total left: 50%
Centre-right: 31%
FN: 12%
Others: 7%

For 2015 the lists look like:

Alsace-Champagne-Ardenne-Lorraine
FN 36%
United Right 26%
United Left 16% - will not withdraw

The remainder (22%) of the vote roughly split: 15% left, 7% right, so we can expect:

FN 39%
Right: 32%
Left: 30%
and then if the roughly 1/3 of the left voters vote right, the FN do not win.

Aquitaine-Limousin-Poitou-Charentes
United Left 30%
United Right 27%
FN 23%

Auvergne-Rhone-Alpes
United Right 32%
FN 26%
United Left 24%

Bourgogne-Franche-Comte
FN 31%
United Right 24%
United Left 23%

Balance is roughly 14% left, 8% right, so left should win here, assuming FN gain little support

Brittany
United Left 35%
United Right 23%
FN 18%

Centre-Loire Valley
FN 30%
United Right 26%
United Left 24%

Left should win here

Corsica
Diverse Left 18%
Build Corsica 18%
United Right 13%
Diverse Right 13%
FN 11%

French Guiana
Diverse Right 42%
Diverse Left 30%

Guadeloupe
Diverse Left 44%
United Left 41%

Ile-De-France
United Right 31%
United Left 25%
FN 18%

Languedoc-Roussillon-Midi-Pyrénées
FN 32%
United Left 24%
United Right 19%
Greens 10%

Greens have merged with Left for round 2, so the Left should win

Reunion
United Right 40%
Diverse Left 24%
Democratic Movement 20%

Martinique
Diverse left 39%
Independent Martinique 30%
United Right 14%

Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie
FN 41%
United Right 25%
United Left 18% - has withdrawn

Normandy
United Right 28%
FN 28%
United Left 24%

Pays de la Loire
United Right 33%
United Left 26%
FN 21%

Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur
FN 41%
United Right 26%
United Left 17% - has withdrawn

So except for the overseas departements, the FN will have seats everywhere, which is a big advance on 2010, where they only reached round 2 in a few areas.


As for the Presidencies, they are in two horse races in Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie against the centre-right, and the same in Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur, and should win against a choice of left and right candidates in Alsace-Champagne-Ardenne-Lorraine.

In 2010 the FN increased their share by only 20% from Round 1 to Round 2 in Nord-Pas-De-Calais, and 22% in Picardie, and just 13% in Provence-Alpes-Cote d'Azur.

So if you were going to place a wager, I'd say that in Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie, the FN will win, what with Calais being the battlefront for immigration, but in Provence they might just be pipped at the post - although even so, the Right need to double their vote there, with tactical voting to keep the FN out.

And the split vote in Alsace should do it for the FN....

[RickRoll]

Le Pen (Marine) is standing for President in Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardie, so she has a very good chance of becoming actual government - the new regions are bigger than the old ones, so she will, if successful, preside over billions of euros.

Le Pen (Marion) is also standing as President in Provence-Alpes-Cote-D'Azur.

So there might be two Le Pens in power.

[ppeatfruit]

OMG

[NoTechnologicalBreakdown]

That looks to me like a very thorough and fair analysis Manatee. The extent of the divides concern me more than anything else, we need much flatter societies that can actually empathise with all their participants as both economic digits and actual real people. If we had that perhaps there'd be less hatred and resentment going round.

[mix56]

The essential problems in the PACA region are to do with immigrants & hand outs to non working & foreign people who have not participated in the system, jobs or lack of, unfair laws re other EU nation companies not paying any corporate taxes & putting a lot of artisans out of business (approx 90% social charges in France) the elite in Paris ignoring the people who can't survive, whilst giving unbelievable sums to people just arriving, but in some cases None to the residential citizen who has paid contributions...
it goes on & on.... french bureaucracy & "Fonctionnaires" (30% odd of the working force) with nothing to do but make new rules, & then push paper....
taxes sky high, most middle class people actually struggling to live.

The people do not necessarily look back at the "Peachy" period, they are simply struggling to pay their bills & survive. whilst paying huge taxes & social charges, which are then given away to the immigrants.

M Hollande is not dealing with this. Sarkozy didn't deal with this...

[Tiisha]

Hardly a surprise. Those of us who know France extremely well would have a hard case arguing that it wasn't xenophobic from as far back as we remember. Infact, i could combine my memories with those of my parents and give you half a century's worth of racist anecdotes (which was obviously preceded by Vichy anyway).

[MrsUltra]

Tiisha Agree.
Ex-BIL was a gendarme and when I accidentally knocked someone's car in a supermarket car park and took the details, he said I shouldn't bother paying them as they were only gipsies...

[Tiisha]

MrsUltra sounds about right. I actually began to feel physically unwell from hearing the neverending onslaught of racist abuse spilling from the mouths of these 'socialists'...very different to what I had been taught about socialism chez nous! France is an extremely racist country. Their far right has always been active and taken seriously. Perhaps people have short memories but even several years ago, they were tipped to win the election and it took a determined effort on the part of trad non voters to drive them out again

[TwistInMySobriety]

No FN regions, ouf. And France is no more racist than Britain. Just ask my UK family who think Hindus wipe their arses with their hands. Oh and for the record when Le Pen made it to the second round of the presidential elections dueto a number of factors, Chirac was elected by something like 87%. If Britain had the same electoral system, UKIP would likely be where the FN is now. The number of voters is comparable.

[Tiisha]

Twist .. are you native French as in born-and-bred? Because if you aren't there is no way that you would have a handle on the true opinions of those who are. France is polite society, they don't generally wear their hearts on their sleeves in the company of outsiders

[TwistInMySobriety]

I've lived here for twenty years, am bilingual, live and work in a wholly French environment, have a French husband and a French son. I think I have a fairly good handle on what French people think, thanks. Insofar as there can be said to be one "true opinion" of what French people think. I expect my Franco-Algerian neighbours here in the neuf-cube have a different "true opinion" to an FN voter living in PACA.

[Tiisha]

So 'no' then. I expect the Indian neighbours of your British family probably also believe that they are regarded as perfectly hygienic and upstanding citizens by the indigenous population.