Email List
Most Popular This Week
- Study: Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide Linked to Cancer, Autism, Parkinson's
- Everything Is Rigged: The Biggest Price-Fixing Scandal Ever
- Hundreds of Chicago Students Walk Out of Standardized Test
- The Same Motive for Anti-US 'Terrorism' Is Cited Over and Over
- What Does It Mean To Be An “American” Corporation?
Popular content
Today's Top News
Jean-Luc Mélenchon Has What France Needs. Sarkozy and Hollande Do Not
Sarkozy has only made France more unequal, but there is a progressive presidential candidate who hasn't fallen for austerity
France's conservative president, Nicholas Sarkozy, ran for office in 2007 on a programme of making the French economy more like that of the United States. He picked a bad time for that: the US was on the brink of its worst recession since the Great Depression, and would help drag down Europe and much of the world economy as the American economy collapsed. He probably wouldn't want to say these things today, after the US has had four years with hardly any economic growth at all.
Jean-Luc Mélenchon 'seems to be the only one in the race that understands the real economic choices faced by France and the eurozone.' (Photograph: Solal/Sipa/Rex Features)
But Sarkozy did succeed in making the French economy more like the US in some ways. After being one of the few high-income countries that didn't have an increase in inequality from the mid-1980s to the mid-2000s, France has become more unequal since Sarkozy was elected. For example, the ratio of the income of people in the 99th percentile (near the top) to the first percentile (at the bottom) went from 11.8 to 16.2. Other measures of inequality have also increased significantly (the Gini coefficient rose from 26.6 to 29.9). This happened from 2007 to 2010; it is probably worse today. By raising the retirement age – a wholly unnecessary change that drew enormous opposition and protests – Sarkozy also helped to make France even more unequal.
The comparison between France and the US is a good one, because the two countries have about the same level of productivity, or output per hour. This means that they have the economic capacity to enjoy about the same living standards. The French have chosen to take their productivity gains in the form of shorter work hours, longer vacations, universal healthcare, free college education and childcare, and a more equal distribution on income. By contrast, in the US more than 60% of the income gains of the past three decades have gone to the richest 1%. Poverty is now back to the rates of the late 1960s; college tuition costs have soared, we have no legally mandated paid holidays or vacations, and 52 million Americans remain without health insurance (although this could be reduced in the coming years, depending partly on the supreme court).
Most French citizens like their economic security and shared prosperity. So it may seem odd that someone with Sarkozy's programme could have been elected in the first place, and have a chance to win re-election. But this is largely due to popular misunderstanding of the most important economic issues, aided and abetted by flawed media coverage. As in 2007, the conventional wisdom is that France is living beyond its means, and Sarkozy now warns that France could be the next Greece and face economic meltdown if he is not re-elected. He pledges to balance France's national budget by 2016.
Unfortunately his Socialist party rival, Francois Hollande, pledges to balance the budget by 2017. Of course there are some important differences between the two, but if either candidate were to implement a fiscal austerity programme of this magnitude while the French and European economies are this weak, it is almost certain that unemployment and other economic and social problems will worsen. And France will lose some its important economic and social achievements.
Fortunately France has a more progressive alternative: Jean-Luc Mélenchon, backed by the Left Front. He seems to be the only one in the race that understands the real economic choices faced by France and the eurozone. France does not need austerity – that would be its best chance of actually ending up like Greece. Mélenchon proposes instead that the European Central Bank do its job and make loans to France and other European governments at 1%, as it does for the banks. France's interest burden on its debt is already quite reasonable, at about 2.4% of GDP; so if it can keep borrowing costs low it can grow its way out of its current problems, creating employment and increasing incomes in the process. That is sensible macroeconomic policy.
Mélenchon also wants to reduce work hours and raise the minimum wage, and increase taxes on the rich. He rejects the balanced-budget nonsense – as even most economists in the US do – and also the European Central Bank's lack of commitment to full employment. This also makes economic sense, especially in a time of recession when the ECB can create money (the US Federal Reserve has created $2.3tr since 2008) without fear of excess inflation.
In the French elections, the top two finishers go to a second round if, as appears likely, neither gets a majority in the first round on 22 April. Mélenchon is currently polling about 15% of the vote, but would probably be even higher if not for the fear that he could push the Socialist party out of the second round of the election. That happened in 2002, when the far-right, anti-immigrant candidate took second place. But there is no significant chance of a repeat this year; Marine Le Pen is polling at just 13%. So it would seem that anyone who wants to preserve French living standards and way of life should cast their vote for Mélenchon.
Compared with the US, it is much easier for a third party candidate in France to have a significant influence even without winning. Hollande has already moved left to capture the Left Front's voters, and Mélenchon will have the bargaining chip of his endorsement for the second round. With the two big parties committed to economic policies that will lower French living standards for the majority – in 2007 it was just Sarkozy who made this commitment – it's hard to think of a more appropriate time to vote "outside the box".
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
23 Comments so far
Show AllI wish we had a chance of electing someone with the sensibilities and integrity of Jean-Luc Mélenchon but our system is too corrupted to allow it and unfortunately most American progressives would shout it down in favor of the Democratic candidate.
Excellent, accurate article by Weisbrot. A few salient points:
"Most French citizens like their economic security and shared prosperity. So it may seem odd that someone with Sarkozy's programme could have been elected in the first place, and have a chance to win re-election. But this is largely due to popular misunderstanding of the most important economic issues, aided and abetted by flawed media coverage."
This cannot be overemphasized. There was, and is, a very real media complicity in the misrepresentation of the facts of the country's economy and foreign policy. It was the main reason Sarkozy was elected in the first place. Some media watchdogs conducted surveys during and after the 2007 election and found that the principal TV networks, public and private, gave the Snark about TWICE the amount of media coverage as his rival Segolène Royale. It was patently unfair. Weisbrot goes on:
"As in 2007, the conventional wisdom is that France is living beyond its means."
Does that ring a bell, folks? It's a similar refrain to that which we Americans hear all the time about Social Security: that it's "unsustainable", "headed for bankruptcy," you name it, when it is actually one of the healthiest of the government's programs, which is why they're always raiding the fund to pay for their other black holes of spending. In France, as in Greece, Italy, Spain, etc., they're always saying it's the social programs that are bankrupting the national governments, EVEN AS THEY REDUCE TAXES FOR THE RICH AND SPEND VAST AMOUNTS IN MILITARY ADVENTURES. We live in a time of tremendous intellectual dishonesty on the part of the governing classes across the West, and there is no indication that anywhere near a majority of people are aware of this, numbed as they are by their TVs and mass media (yes, even in France). And the media, owned by the same classes that run the governments and banks, keep repeating the false message, oftentimes throwing in a nice dash of racism to spice up the pot. Thus it's the "laziness" and "coddled, dishonest nature" of those swarthy Greeks and Spaniards that have got those countries into such trouble, because "nobody wants to work," whereas their economies have been gutted by financial speculators above all (some of them Greek and Spanish, of course, but many of them foreign). And here in France, of course, it's all those darkies from abroad wanting to immigrate to "so they can leech off the social welfare system" while they try to "convert the country to Islam." You have no how idea how many people, even self-declared to be "of the Left," believe this crap. You can't get away from it, and it also serves to justify the murderous recent maraudings of NATO, with France leading the charge, in destroying Libya and feeding arms, logistical help, and even special forces to the criminal rebellion currenty destroying Syria. ALMOST NOBODY realizes the reality of these issues, again thanks to a complicit media, especially as there is nothing here in France even remotely resembling the teeming samizdat of alternative internet news sources the Americans and English-speaking peoples of the world have put together. Proof of this is that even the far left in France supported the bogus "humanitarian" intervention in Libya, uncritically swallowing the mountains of lies fed to the population about Gaddafi's supposed depredations, which have been since debunked. And until there is a broader awakening as to the manipulation of information in France, people will continue to believe their TVs and newspapers. A change in government with Hollande might remedy the situation slightly, but not enough to bring about the sea change needed in people's consciousness about the realities of political life today. It would help to have a more honest and critical intellectual class to sort out the lies from the half truths and truths, but unfortunately, France no longer has such towering world-class voices for justice and decency as Sartre or Bourdieu, but has to settle for useless fops like Bernard-Henri Lévy and Pascal Bruckner who merely cater to the existing power structure. The change in consciousness is going to have to come from the bottom up, if it ever comes at all.
Bingo!
Firstly, I'll say after Kradek, that Mélanchon's supporting of USA's war against Iraq in 2003 and that of NATO in Libya makes problem…
His claimed religion is today to strengthen UN and to plan nothing abroad without its blessing…
Well, let's try to see :
- for the first case (Iraq), as some European's interests* where concerned that pushed France and Germany to say "no", USA passed beside ;
- for the second one, as China and Russia judged it wasn't so important to stop Sarkozy there, UN mandated NATO to do the job.
Having written that, I have to admit, I'm not sure about Mélanchon's… posture.
It seems however for the second case, that his motivation was to make the revolution win, after the one in Tunisia, also to help in preparing the french minds to "Indignation and Resistance", when the purpose of Sarkozy was just to try to control the rebel's movements and to destroy a man (Gaddafi) who knew too much !
Secondly, I must confirm that even if Holland wants to change something in the manipulation of information we have had to cope with since the mind 90's, when against any low, concentration of medias occurred, it will be very difficult to achieve.
Fortunately, some electronic medias like "Médiapart", driven by the free and excellent Edwyn Plenel (late chief of Le Monde newspaper) have arisen and give us a unique path to informations.
Antoine
-
* in fact, one remember that Hussein was up to accept to be payed with €'s…
Thank you for the Live Witness coverage, Clovis. Of course you recognize the parallels with American media using similar messages to convince the public that austerity is a necessity, while "illegal" immigrants, Muslims, Feminists, and public school teachers become the scapegoats du jour. And as social programs are cut, there is STILL talk of lowering taxes for the very rich.
I agree with you 100% about the media's knowing complicity in planting this dis-information in viewers' minds. Still, when I point this out over and over again in this forum, the libertarians squawk back that it's the FAULT of individuals, those "stupid" Americans.
Perhaps if they studied Edward Bernays, Barnum, Pavlov, and Goebbels, they'd better understand the nature of the dynamic at work. Thank you for an excellent post.
I've just forgotten an important fact : despite the kind of media's "omertà" Mr Mélenchon experienced, just like any other "not important candidate" (what he might have looked like at the beginning, with about 4-5% ratings), he amazingly succeeded in getting a correct one 3 mounths later.
In the mean time, he had to fight a number of radio and TV speakers and even Mme Le PEN, the FN candidate (fascist party), refusing to debate against him, live, during primetime in one of the most important national channel, arguing he was "nothing" (in termes of ratings) compared to her !!
In fact, about one week later, he was before her…
The means he used in battling all those people was always the same : going back and back to fundamentals about real hopes of the citizens, wordings, definitions of every term ; parsing a lot of ideas, aso, in order to make it clear.
A beautiful work, and mainly the good way to convince people to look differently at the politics.
The contrary of "empty promises" in fact : just trying to give anybody a chance to be a pertinent and active citizen.
It's good to have confirmation of the article from a man on the ground in France, clovis.
It appears the French Socialist party has taken the route of Democrats in the US, Labor in the UK, and predominant, former mildly-leftist parties in practically all western countries.
Since about 1980, all these parties have moved to the right, so as to be practically indistinguishable from their conservative opponents.
An amazing coincidence, or a well planned and executed strategy of unified western capitalism? If the latter, when and where was the planning done?
There are no coincidences in politics; just plans and predators' "opportunities".
Interesting piece from Weisbrot and an even more interesting contribution from Clovis. Thank you for the elucidation.
At least there is a modest hope of some election improvements in France. In the USA it is a race to the bottom ... and just when you think they can't sink any lower in the slime... they find a new trapdoor to squirm through.
The only region of the planet where an authentic political left seems to have any vitality in it is Latin America. In the good ole' USA we seem to be embarked on a project to find a happy medium between Alice in Wonderland and 1984.
"At least there is a modest hope of some election improvements in France. In the USA it is a race to the bottom ... "
This is true. Even Sarkozy is to the left of basically all US Democrats except Dennis the K and Bernie Sanders. But this is also because he could never get elected if he wasn't. Sarko was surrounded by financiers before the big collapse of 2008. Now it's no longer advisable, so he appears to be more "moderate" in terms of his desire to dismantle the welfare state. But this is where the looming presence of the European Union government and Brussels come into play. With their totally undemocratic diktats they allow rightwing European leaders to pretend that the neoliberal "reforms" demanded by Brussels are "out of their hands." It's a very subtle shell game that won't end until the Europeans, probably with the Greeks leading the way, as in Antiquity, break the stranglehold that the banks exercise through the EU. Let's hope it happens soon.
"It's a very subtle shell game that won't end until the Europeans, probably with the Greeks leading the way, as in Antiquity, break the stranglehold that the banks exercise through the EU. Let's hope it happens soon."
There's a wildcard in that mix. Romney's backers could decide to "help" precipitate a European crisis and banking collapse in very late summer, mirroring the collapse of 2008 that swept Republicans from power then, but seeking to sweep out Democrats in 2012. If Greece is going to pull out anyway, ironically, they may get a push from the other side at that point in time. That complicates the odds and the consequences ...
What are the politics of French Left Front candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon?
Mélenchon’s message is that workers can get better wages, living conditions, and public services by electing an outspoken but experienced politician of the French Republic like himself. He told La Voix du Nord, “We are not the far left, we are the left of concrete radicality.”
As any examination of his political history shows, however, Mélenchon’s promises are empty. He is promoting policies he has no intention of carrying out so as to give a falsely radical veneer to French social democratic politicians as they prepare further budget cuts and austerity policies..
.Mélenchon’s explanation in his biography Mélenchon the Plebeian for the abandonment of any reformist program is significant. He blamed “Salvador Allende syndrome,” claiming: “We all had in mind the defeat in Chile.”
He is implying that he was afraid that, if the PS did not follow Mitterrand’s line and abandon reformist policies opposed by the ruling class, it might suffer the fate of Chile’s social democratic regime under President Salvador Allende. In 1973, Allende was overthrown in a US-backed coup led by General Augusto Pinochet. Thousands of Chilean workers and youth were massacred and Allende was shot.
...Such organizational maneuvers have not, however, altered Mélenchon’s reactionary politics. For all his chauvinist anti-American rhetoric, he is a toady of US imperialism. He supported the US-led Iraq War in 2003 and last year’s NATO war in Libya. As for the EU institutions he helped build, they have emerged in the Greek debt crisis as key instruments for the oppression of the European working class by Europe’s imperialist powers.
Mélenchon will inevitably disappoint the hopes for a left-wing policy that millions of people are being encouraged to place in him. The main risk is that, if he is not politically exposed by a challenge from the left, the anger and demoralization arising from the disappointment of these hopes will provide the basis for the emergence of a powerful far-right party.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/apr2012/mele-a10.shtml
Kradek: Your posts are often impressive and profound. Thank you for your contribution to this forum.
Hello, from a western countryside of France, the place where I retired.
I'm new on this blog, having came with the help of a link from Mélenchon's web page.
Glad to have found this very interesting paper and comments.
Being an actor, even modest, of the game we're playing around Mr Mélenchon, I would like to say some words after the ones from Kradek.
To make short, I would say that in fact, the important thing is that Mélenchon and the "Front de Gauche" concept have succeeded in awaking many people and helped them to beleive again (or for the first time for young citizens) in politics.
You say, and it may be part of the truth, that "[his] promises are empty" ; the question is not really there, yet : it is just to build, or re-build, a strong political movement, based on conscious citizens.
The opposite of going-voting-from-time-to-time-consumers.
"L'humain d'abord" (human before, behind) !
This is THE battle.
Lost in the 70th, after 1968's hope about building a pacific, "human", happy world.
—> the well reported problem was that no politic movement had anticipated such curious, spontaneous demands, so it could have taken it "on the fly" and propose a new way of governing…
And the baby boomers falled asleep.
Lost again, at least in France, in the early 80th, when the "Union de la Gauche" of Mr Mitterrand was elected.
- one of the problem was that the socialists, a fully remained old-style, "jacobin" party, cut all its links with Unions (workers, students, pupils' parents, a.s.o.), and turned, like a horse goes back alone to the stable, to the acceptance of what the market was asking for…
The first usefulness of the man, i.e. Mr Mélenchon, is at least to show the seniors how to teach the youth, formally lost to the politic concerns, as their most urgent one is just to find something looking like a job and to keep it for some months….
Will these times we have been living in for some weeks continue to hold the hope of a concrete way of acting politics in a near future ? I really don't know, but can tell that the first response could come with the next elections, one mounth after the presidentials : the deputy's ones.
I would also like to add my thanks to Clovis and Mark for making the distinction between how France and the US treat third parties. There are a few things to add worthy of mentioning. First, the only time third parties get any coverage in the US are when they're rich celebrities such as Ross Perot or the third party candidate is seriously getting framed as "spoiler" by either the Democratic or Republican party. If by chance there were a rightwing third party candidate that the ruling class sees as a huge asset then that candidate will be showered with cold hard cash and plenty of publicity. Other than that, third parties are completely shut off and kept that way. Worse, even the Internet sites which host progressive forums for discussion rarely give any coverage for third parties such as the Green Party - only this site and truth-out did that honor while the rest of the forums made no mention of them. For the most part, people who comment are the ones left trying to bring the candidacies of Stein, Anderson, and Alexander to public attention and I thank the forums for giving us this opportunity. Unfortunately, in all these years, our efforts to inform online appear to fall on deaf ears even at a time when both the Democratic and Republican parties have proven themselves to be total failures. It's amazing that even when all is worse than before, we're up against an army of Bush/Limbaughian/Beckerhead Republicans and Clinton/Obama Democratic Party pr partisans who stubbornly refuse to drop their bs on third parties being "spoilers", that third parties can't win, and the usual tripe. I don't know about France but I take it that people there have open minds and are willing to go on the offensive unlike the declining American Left that has half of them going the "stepford wife" route and thereby allowing the Far Right to bully and abuse everyone and the other half unsure as to how to stop the double madness.
america doesn't have left and doesn't know it
- credit union is the hip economic term nowadays
With some luck and will power, it's not impossible to get even conservatives to embrace credit unions although the strategy is similar to getting them to embrace single payer health care from a conservative point of view.
Why conservatives are always wrong:
http://www.badrepublicans.com/conservatives-always-wrong.html
Unfortunately like the rest of the French political class, Jean-Luc Melenchon embraces nukes.
he doesn't like pollution
Yes, it's true at the moment : but, obviouly, the Front's de Gauche concept of "plannification écologique" doesn't suppose to keep the nucke at the same high level as it has been since the 70' ! on the contrary, the purpose is to prepare its decay in the medium or long term.
In fact, what appears "odd" to part of my generation is that the "good idea" of making some nucke – as a pragmatic answer to OPEC's driven crasy increasing of petroeum's prices having came after the Nixon shock – has turned to a nightmare when nothing serious has been thought and built to substitute to it, thank's to the powerfull nucke lobby.
One of the strength of Front de Gauche is to propose this new way of governing : a Plan, driven by ecological considerations and goals.
L'humain d'abord, dans un écosystème maitrisé…
Very interesting talk by Noam Chomsky at the Le College de France, June 20, 2011 - reviewing the history of the impact of two elemental doctrines being played out today having evoloved into neo-liberalism:
- Efficient Markets Hypothesis
-Theory of Rational Expectations
Modern theory of economic growth -"direction of causality is unknown"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KFzmaEvBTc&feature=related
Last but may be not least, a pair of usefull references about Le Front de Gauche and Mr Mélenchon :
- About defense and geopolitics : http://www.lepartidegauche.fr/videos/video/geopolitique-pour-une-defense-souveraine-altermondialiste-9286
- About "ecologcal planning" : a supplement to the "À gauche" weekly paper, N°1297 as of march the 30th ; "L'écologie c'est Politique"
And also an example of meeting (more than 50.000 attendance ; I was there).
http://www.lepartidegauche.fr/videos/video/discours-jean-luc-melenchon-place-capitole-toulouse-5-avril-2012-9319
Toulouse is a medium size town of about 450.000 inh., the 4th after Paris, Marseille harbour (the next meeting…) and Lyon.