France

Eduardo del Buey
Foto:
La Jornada Maya

Viernes 4 de enero, 2019

In 2017 Emmanuel Macron was elected President of France.

He had no political party, and had never run for political office, although he had served in government as an official and, later, as a minister. He was a graduate of the elite Ecole Nationale d’Administration (ENA). ENA graduates have traditionally held the most prestigious posts in French government, business, banking, and diplomacy, and are perceived to be France’s intellectual, financial, and political elite.

They are also the people said to be the furthest removed from mainstream France, and always display what the French call a certain hauteur. France is very much a class-based society, and nowhere is this more evident than in the civil service and government.

In the fall of 2018 the Macron government tried to implement tax increases on fuel in order to pay for a transition towards a green economy.

A fuel tax targets those who use motor vehicles the most. Those who live in the poorer rural districts that lack mass transit and, because of government cutbacks, also lack basic government services in smaller population centers. Those who own and operate the trucks that transport goods from and to markets. An increased cost of fuel translates into an increased cost of products to the end consumer. A fuel tax is difficult to explain as a way to address climate change. People see it as yet another tax on the middle and lower classes, especially after Macron substantially reduced taxes to the wealthy.

The result was the Gilets Jaunes – a protest movement that sprang up on line and was organized by ordinary people posting videos on social media. It has no set leadership, and has no political party or union movement directing it. It is truly a popular movement, and, from one weekend to the next, it has become more violent, attacking shops and businesses, and engaging in running battles with the police.

Police claim that a majority of those in custody are hard right or hard left professional rioters who have infiltrated the movement for their own political ends. A poll for Harris Interactive after the violence of December 1st found that 72 percent of French people supported the Gilets Jaunes but that 85 percent disagreed with the violence in Paris (The Guardian December 7, 2018).

To date, the Gilets Jaunes don’t have a readily identifiable leader. But should one arise, the 72 percent of French people who support the movement could well translate it into an ongoing political force in some populist’s hands.

In response to the nation-wide demonstrations, Macron had to cancel the tax hikes and make more concessions to the electorate. All in all, not a good time for a politician who has been touted by some as a key leader of the liberal movement against the growing phenomenon of populism affecting the European polity. With Germany’s Angela Merkel leaving office in 2021, and Canada’s Justin Trudeau facing an election later this year, the global liberal movement may face some difficult times ahead.

During his presidency, Macron has reduced taxes on business and the wealthy and tried to modernize the economy. The problem is that the general public has perceived these changes as being put on their backs, and that the government is not listening to them. As stated above, polls show that 72 percent of French citizens support the objectives of the Gilets Jaunes.

After the violence in Paris, Macron did something he had vowed never to do: give in to the demands of the street. He rescinded the fuel tax and the demonstrations have lost some, but not all, of their energy. Macron showed that he had listened. Now he must convince voters that he can lead by listening and learning as well as by communicating effectively.

In recent years, the French have developed a healthy distrust of the political class. Macron was seen as an outsider by French voters and did not win because of his proposed policies but because in the run-off election he ran against far-right leader Marine LePen, whose party and platform continue to remain to date beyond the pale for a majority of voters.

These developments underscore the fact that voters are increasingly prone to reject politicians who don’t appear to connect with the public and understand their concerns and fears.

A government of elitist technocrats must learn the art of politics to gain the experience and intellectual tools with which to connect with the public.

Unchecked, they are divorced from the day-to-day realities of the common voter, and live in a world of ideas and concepts that would make sense in a perfect world, but that do not translate as easily to the realities of the day.

Indeed, the french government seemed to be preoccupied with the macroeconomic impact of its policy (positive) rather than the microeconomic impact (negative). This has been true of many neo-liberal governments over the past forty years.

During its lifespan, neo-liberalism seems to have been focused on free markets and privatization. It has appeared to favor the wealthy over the middle and lower economic classes through deregulation, tax cuts, and the reduction of social services aimed at giving the lower economic classes a stake in the economy.

The stuff of technocrats.

Technocrats function well in technical positions.

But the president, the prime minister, and government ministers are not supposed to be technocrats. Voters expect them to represent the voters’ views, address their needs, and manage their affairs. Technocrats usually lack the ability to read an electorate´s mood, and ensure that change is brought about in a way that the majority can accept and that communications are managed in such a way that the public understands the need for change and that the cost to them of not changing is greater in the longer term. The carbon tax is one example. The perceived commitment to trickle-down economics through tax reductions for the rich are another.

Successful politicians, on the other hand, must first of all learn to listen. They must not only listen, but they must also develop a feel for the average voter. These qualities are not learned at elite business schools, but on the streets campaigning, and learning what sells and what doesn’t.

Political leaders must speak to the population in a language that they understand, with concepts that fit the voters’ mindset, and in ways that do not make the voter feel belittled.

Political leaders must also have networks that they can use not only to communicate with voters but also to hear and understand their concerns. Without a proper party structure, the Macron government lacks the network of municipal and departmental governments as well as political operatives that can act as its eyes and ears and keep senior levels of government in tune with the electorate.

In order to succeed over the next four years of his presidency, Macron must build the two-way communications networks that will put his government in tune with the electorate, and create a communications infrastructure that can shape and articulate effective messages that connect with voters.

Absent these networks and communications between governors and governed, populists can quickly capitalize on the weaknesses of traditional leaders and capture the attention and votes of the electorate. This has happened in other European states and, to a degree in the United States and several Latin American countries.

It will happen in France in the next election if the Macron government does not quickly change course and address the needs of the people rather than follow academically sound prescriptions that bear little relationship to the reality of the majority of French voters.

It has taken a first step by rescinding the fuel taxes.

It remains to be seen if the government can connect with the population and present an economic platform that is political rather than technocratic, and communicate it effectively to a cynical electorate.

[b][email protected][/b]