Ecosocialist Manifesto – the Parti de Gauche (France)

The first round of the 2022 French presidential election will be held on 10 April 2022, with Jean-Luc Mélenchon of the Parti de Gauche standing as the candidate of Union Populaire, with a run off, if necessary on 24 April. The election will take place just before the 2022 legislative election, that will be held on 12 June with runoffs on 19 June, to elect the 577 members of the National Assembly, the lower house of the French Parliament. 

This is an extract from the Parti de Gauche Ecosocialist Manifesto. The full Manifesto can be found here. 

Ecosocialism as a Necessary Contemporary Alternative 

In a context where years of climate change denial suddenly gave way to dystopia, we have to look at the situation with responsibility and clarity. Social inequalities are worsening, global fascism is rising, the climate is changing, biodiversity is eroding, global health crises are emerging: these are all warnings. Scientists are pushing for a rapid reorganization of the way we produce and a reevaluation of our needs. 

This requires that we change our philosophical outlook and our relationship with nature. Due to the inaction of past governments on the planet which were ignorant, irresponsible, or servile towards profit-driven lobbies, we have already lost 50 precious years since these risks were known. We know that the capitalist world will do anything to continue following its own interest and will not change by its own accord. 

Today, the crisis is not only social, democratic, or environmental - there is a systemic and paradigmatic crisis in our thermo-industrial era, known today as the Capitalocene. It is a crisis of capitalist exchange and exploitation. It created a dynamic where organized predation upon nature and workers come together. Our civilization is vulnerable to a chain reaction of effects caused by globalization, global finance, algorithmic control of societal norms, and the loss of manual skills and knowledge. 

The odds of a worldwide systemic collapse are unknown but we already know that we are surpassing important thresholds and natural limits. Of 10 global limits identified by a group of researchers in 2009, four have already been surpassed. Disasters continue to target the most vulnerable. With wildfires, droughts, floods, diminished harvests, health issues, and increased risks of conflicts, it is apparent that ecosystem health is a challenge for social justice, health, and peace. Human life on earth is at stake. 

Ecosocialism is a systemic analysis that states that ecology is not compatible with capitalism which necessitates productivism and global finance. Ecosocialism holistically analyses the social, environmental, economic, and democratic impacts of our current system. This analysis’ radicalism, which consists in observing the roots of our problems, allows us to avoid support for green capitalism or neoliberal visions of ecology. These two concepts allow a narrow course of action, addressing only the consequences of capitalism without addressing the causes of its problems to overturn it. 

To engage on these issues, we need to change the economic system, the organization of production, and social forces to be successful. The general interest is intertwined with the question of saving our ecosystem. We cannot hide a necessary clash of interests : we need to engage in a show of force against the global financial system and with those who believe in the interest of the few, rather than the vast majority. The construction of this balance of power presumes a project, a new utopian vision : a horizon for society which acts as an attainable goal but also as a motivation. 

Ecosocialism is a stationary lighthouse in a world in full turmoil. Our political responsibility doesn’t dwell on believing this or that hypothesis, declaring ourselves to be optimists or pessimists, but in observing facts, testifying to the truth, and acting with clear-headedness. It also implies showing who is accountable for systemic crises without making mistakes (the oligarchy and not the working class). We also have to illustrate environmental inequalities, debunk the “green” shams, rethink how human beings fit in our ecosystem, and build the beacon of a desirable future by assessing the dead-ends of the past. 

Ecosocialism is about reorienting the economy to meet people’s needs, establishing a maximum authorized income, implementing the “green rule,” relocalizing production, discussing the myth of growth, reducing our energy consumption, developing food sovereignty, reinventing our relationship with nature and other species. We must not forget the ideological and cultural battle, social struggles, resistance to oppression, or international solidarity. Ecosocialism draws the shape of a more harmonious, fairer world which could sustain the current shocks of our time. 

This Ecosocialist Manifesto translates these ideas into the form of a political manifesto consisting of 26 theses. It is a guide of common interest to save every tenth of a degree of the changing climate we can, save every scrap of endangered nature we can save, and absorb the social and biophysical damage already in progress. It is a precious tool to help us think and prepare for the world we wish to see tomorrow. It is today that we will build tomorrow. 

We must sow the seeds of the future now. Whatever happens, every party advocating for ecosocialism will have built the foundations of a new vision, a new imaginary order, unfamiliar collective stories, and a renewed social organisation and cosmogony to plant seeds bearing societal transformation. 

The National Executive Secretary of the Parti de Gauche (Party of the Left)

Who will be best placed to defeat Emmanuel Macron in 2022 in France?

Jean-Luc Mélenchon and his guest Eric Piolle at the Summer Camp of “France Unbowed”.

August 2020

Written by Claire Fairbrother

In the absence of a clear challenger to president Emmanuel Macron - other than Marine Le Pen, the populist leader of the Front National - activists from Europe Écologie-les-Verts (EELV) and from La France Insoumise (LFI) or “France unbowed “were given the rare opportunity this Summer to explore the idea of bringing the two parties together with a single candidate for the 2022 presidential elections. 

Whether the purpose of the event held on Friday 21^st August where the mayor of Grenoble Eric Piolle turned up as a guest of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of LFI was anything but a publicity stunt remains to be seen.

Cynicism aside, however, the significance of this very public meeting of minds between those two high profile French political figures coming from such different ideologies and political journeys should not be underestimated.

The friendship between the two men was forged in the course of Eric Piolle’s 2014 mayoral election in Grenoble, the dynamic and innovative capital of the French Alps. Bringing together members from the city’s civic society considerable network and five different progressive parties, including candidates from  Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s LFI, the 41 years old ecologist and former Hewlett Packard Manager ran a campaign based on an agreed programme of environmental and social justice pledges.

At the 2017 presidential elections, EELV and Eric Piolle called on voters to support Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s candidature. In 2019, the mayor of Grenoble and his cross parties list of candidates were re-elected with a 53% majority.

A life long socialist, 69 years old MP, MEP and leader of a 70,000 members strong France Unbowed, Jean-Luc Mélenchon has some experience as a candidate for the presidential elections. In 2012, he ran for the “Front de Gauche”, an electoral pact between socialists, communists and two minor left wing parties. He came fourth and achieved 11% of the vote in the first round. In 2017, he came third with 19.58% of the votes. Because of the two rounds system of voting, Mélenchon never reached the final presidential contest. Only the two candidates with the largest number of votes in the first round can enter the second round.

Since 2017, the list of candidates for Europe Écologie-les-Verts came third at the 2019 European Elections with 13.47% of the votes. At the municipal elections held in March this year, a historic green wave  swept up votes in 8 of the 10 major cities, including Lyon, Bordeaux, Strasbourg, Tour, Annecy, and for the second time in  Grenoble.

Which brings us back to the significance of the capital of the Alps mayor Eric Piolle making a guest appearance at the France Unbowed summer camp on Friday 21^st August. Jean-Luc Mélenchon welcomed his friend with these warm words: “His presence here means one thing. We have to get to what is fundamental. Yes, of course, we must talk about what we disagree about, but we must also make the most of what we are in agreement with”. And added “There is no doubt that we have a debt towards the historic ecology movement, but from where we stand, you cannot behave as if you could have it all”.

Eric Piolle proposed that for the regional elections in 2021 and this in 4 of the 13 regions, EELV and LFI could prove that, “together, we can win”, to which Mélenchon replied “Piolle is the only one from EELV who says that this is possible”. However, wishing to go much further, he added: “There are 13 regions, and we are for the same thing to apply everywhere”.

So, what are the chances of a green/red alliance as favoured by these two unlikely political companions of delivering future electoral successes beyond the municipal level?

What is clear is that LFI, with its disciplined democratic centralist model, well trained and committed cadres, a charismatic leader and an alleged membership of 500,000, it is a left wing party which can legitimately claim to have had the support of 7 million of the electorate at the first round of the 2017 presidential elections. It is a party machine designed to win elections and in particular, presidential ones.

With EELV, we are dealing with a much looser organisation - more like a mini-federation operating within the wider and diverse ecology movement.  It is difficult to know exactly how many people are members as people join, leave and rejoin and, invariably, on the internet.  A figure of 10,000 members has been quoted, but that may be an underestimation.

What does make EELV a strong organisation is therefore not so much its internal governance or actual membership, but its strong message about the imminent threat of global warming for future generations and its grass roots presence.  

It has been reported that 36% of French people support the “ecology movement”. One of the main weaknesses of EELV is its lack of a recognised leader who could possibly come second at the first round of the 2022 presidential elections and hope to defeat Emmanuel Macron at the second round.

By putting himself forward as the potential EELV presidential candidate for 2022, and by being seen actively engaged in a dialogue with the leader of France Unbowed, Eric Piolle is going where no one from the ecology movement has gone before. His very public appearance at the France Unbound summer camp and his show of friendship with Jean-Luc Mélenchon is not only challenging his own party leader, the more “liberal” MEP Yannick Jadot, but it is also laying the foundations for an eco-socialist alternative to neo-liberal capitalism and “politics as usual”.

Claire Fairbrother is an ecosocialist activist.

Links

https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr/auvergne-rhone-alpes/isere/grenoble/eric-piolle-jean-luc-melenchon-aux-amphis-ete-insoumis-ensemble-on-peut-gagner-1864848.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReC5DKetyPg

https://www.nouvelobs.com/politique/20200826.OBS32543/melenchon-montebourg-l-ecolo-eric-piolle-cultive-son-reseau.html

https://www.challenges.fr/politique/pour-sa-rentree-melenchon-tend-la-main-a-eelv-afin-de-continuer-a-peser_723915

https://www.leparisien.fr/politique/municipales-la-vague-verte-effet-vitrine-ou-acte-fondateur-29-06-2020-8344257.php

https://en-gb.facebook.com/ericpiolle/

https://melenchon.fr/

2018 – The Year in Blog Posts

Below are the most popular posts on this blog, as judged by unique page views, by month, for 2018. The blog is closing now until the New Year.

Happy holiday to all our readers.

January

Is the Tory Party in Terminal Decline?

It is not just a lefty like me pondering this matter, the Tories are openly posing this question themselves. Rumours are circulating that membership has fallen to as low as 70,000, and this is causing some soul searching in the party.

February

Why I Hate the Tories

I am from a Labour party supporting background, raised in local authority housing, schooled and paid for and maintained in higher education by the same municipality, a Labour run council. My dad was a shop steward in the engineering union too, so it’s no surprise then that I have never even considered supporting the Tory party.

March

Theresa May’s Response to Outing Gay People is Cynical and Irresponsible

Being gay in Pakistan is a much bigger deal than in Britain, and this news could well endanger Sanni’s family. Why Parkinson decided to make public the fact he and Sanni had had an eighteen month relationship, is not entirely clear, but it certainly looks like an attempt to smear Sanni’s revelations in some way as unreliable.

April

Why Remainers Should Vote Green in the Local Elections

The local authority elections on 3 May, are the last full scale elections in England before our departure from the European Union in March 2019. Yes, it looks like we will get a transitional deal which will last for almost two further years, when to all intents and purposes nothing will change, but we will no longer be a member of the EU. So, this is the last chance to send a message to the Labour and Tory parties, whose leaderships are in favour leaving.

May

The UK Monarchy and the Ragged Trousered Philanthropists who Pay for It

After writing about the Royal wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle recently, I got to thinking about the overall cost of the Monarchy to UK taxpayers. Estimates put the cost of the wedding itself at around £32 million, but this is just an added extra. The more you look into the matter, the more you wonder why we put up with this historical privilege?

June

Football World Cup – England’s Triumph of Hope over Expectation

“It’s not the despair, I can take the despair. It’s the hope I can’t stand.” So says John Cleese in the film Clockwise. This quote rather sums up the attitude of England football fans as each World Cup and European Championship comes around. The 2018 World Cup in Russia began yesterday, and England fans and pundits are in familiar territory.

July

Could the UK be Self-Sufficient in Food After Brexit?

With stories circulating about the British government stockpiling food, as part of a plan to cover the eventuality of a no deal Brexit, there is talk that the UK should become more self-sufficient in food once we leave the European Union (EU). Of course all this would take time, certainly longer than by our exit from the EU, which will happen in eight months’ time. But as a longer term objective, this would surely be a sensible thing to do. It would avoid tailbacks at ports and environmentally concerned people should welcome it, too. But is it feasable?

August

Tory Brexiteers Finally Come Up With Alt-Brexit Plan

It is more than two years now since the referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union (EU), where of course we voted to leave. It has been a feature, during the referendum campaign itself and in the period since, that those who advocated Brexit haven’t come up with any sort of plan for life outside of the union. What kind of relationship with the EU do they want, if any at all?

September

Why the Green Party Should Not Adopt the IHRA's Contentious Examples

In fighting antisemitism for a long time, the threat has been adequately understood as ‘hostility towards Jews as Jews’.  But this simple definition does not suffice for a different political agenda, namely: conflating antisemitism with criticism of Israel in order to attack the Palestine solidarity movement and intimidate its supporters.   This article will explain the attack, its background in a racist agenda and the necessary anti-racist response. For numerous sources, see hyperlinks in this piece.

October

Removing the Borrowing Cap on Councils Alone is not Enough – End the Right to Buy as Well

In her closing address, Theresa May, the prime minister, told the Conservative Party Conference removing the cap on local authority borrowing against Housing Revenue Accounts (HRA) would help the Government achieve its ambition of building 300,000 homes a year by the middle of the next decade.

November

Extinction Rebellion London – I was Arrested, but that’s Not going to Stop Me Protesting

Following my involvement, on Saturday 17 November, in Extinction Rebellion’s very successful Rebellion Day 1 in London, friends have said I should feel proud of what I did.  ‘Yes’, I was one of over 6000 climate protectors who, peacefully, blocked 5 of London’s central bridges for most of that day - my allocated one was Lambeth Bridge:

December

Emmanuel Macron & the Yellow Vests Protests: A Lesson in How Not to Mitigate Climate Change

Capitalist climate governance has always relied on pseudo-reforms that leave the richest free to accumulate capital, while dumping taxes on working people to nudge them in the ’right direction’. But as the protests of the gilets jaunes show, many working people no longer accept the moralising terms of capitalist approaches to climate change. In this article, Andreas Malm argues that if we really want to save this Planet, we must pursue a different kind of climate politics, one that could learn a great deal from the methods and tactics of the gilets jaunes. 

UK Engages in Expensive Gesture Politics in Syria

Damage to the Syrian Scientific Research Center after it was attacked by U.S., British and French military strikes to punish Syrian President Bashar Assad for suspected chemical attack against civilians, in Barzeh, near Damascus (credit NBC News).

In the early hours of Saturday the US, France and UK military forces launched a missile attack on targets in Syria, as a response to the alleged chemical weapons attack by Syrian forces last week. The Pentagon says three targets were hit by more than a hundred missiles. The facilities hit were used in the production of chemical weapons according to the Pentagon and has reduced Syria’s capability to produce these weapons. Missiles were launched from aircraft and ships.

At the time of writing information is short on the extent of the damage on the ground and whether there have been any civilian casualties resulting from the strikes. It is hard to believe there were none, from what we have seen in the past when cruise missiles are used in urban areas, like Saturday’s attack. If the reports coming out of the US, France and UK are correct and these sites did indeed hold chemical weapons, then there is surely a risk of chemicals being released into the atmosphere?

For the UK’s part, official reports say that four Tornado war planes took part in the attack, launching cruise missiles while airborne, probably from outside of Syrian airspace. It costs millions of pounds to use one these missiles, so the raid will have run into approaching half a billion pounds to the UK taxpayer, when we have been told for the last eight years that the country is skint, and can’t afford decent public services. How many nurses and police officers could that pay for? Quite few, I think.

The UK prime minister, Theresa May, took the decision to authorise the attack while Parliament is still on Easter recess. MPs return on Monday when Parliament reopens, and an emergency debate will be held, in retrospect. Constitutionally, it is not entirely clear that May is allowed to take military action, without the approval of Parliament.

This is because the British constitution in general is not clear, it is not written down in any one document, like the US constitution, but rather has evolved over time and has many different feeds into what is constitutional. May will claim that she doesn’t need Parliament’s approval, and in some ways she is right. Declaring war was always a subject that attracted the Royal Prerogative, like other foreign policy issues.

But the British constitution is in many cases based on conventions. In 2003, Tony Blair to his credit, allowed a debate and vote on the UK getting involved in the invasion of Iraq, although he didn’t have to constitutionally. I think he wanted the extra cover this would provide him with, because the action was controversial in the country at large. David Cameron followed suit when he was prime minister and wanted to bomb Syria. Cameron unlike Blair lost the vote in Parliament.

What this did was to establish a convention, that when acts of war are being authorised, Parliament should have a say, and take the final decision. So, from this point of view, May’s actions are unconstitutional. This illustrates why we need a proper written down constitution, rather than the mixed bag of a one that the UK currently has.  

The attack appears to have been careful to avoid Russian military casualties, and Russia was given advance warning of the operation. The scale is also fairly limited, but is being justified as a deterrent to Syria’s president Assad using chemical weapons again. I find this unconvincing. The US bombed Syria a year ago with the same reasoning, but appear to have not deterred this latest use of chemical weapons, if they were used, which is still not fully established.

So, the assumption is that this is just an expensive gesture type of politics, which has no further justification or aims. A deadly but futile gesture. I hope MPs put the prime minister on the spot on Monday, because I can’t see what this action was meant to meaningfully achieve?  

A New Party for the Right ‘Centre’ Ground?

The Observer reported at the weekend on plans for a new centre party in UK politics. This new party will apparently have at least £50 million in funds and is backed by a network of entrepreneurs, philanthropists and donors. As The Observer says:

‘Senior figures from the worlds of business and charity are understood to be involved, as well as former supporters of the main parties, including a number of former Tory donors.’

A final decision has not yet been taken as to whether the new formation will become an electoral party or whether it will instead fund community activity to try and influence other political parties. The organisation has had full time staff working for it for the past year.

It will apparently take ideas from both the left and right of the political spectrum, and might well look something like new Labour. Tony Blair, one of the main architects of new Labour in the 1990s, stopped short of backing the new party, speaking on the BBC Today programme, but said that there is a huge gap on the centre ground in UK politics. Blair commented:

“What is most sensible is for both of the main parties to realise they can pour scorn on people who are thinking of these things, but ultimately they’ve got to understand there is a constituency in this country which is socially liberal, in favour of strong methods of social justice, but also believes in a well-run enterprising economy.”

Opinion polling suggests that most people tend to define their political views as centrist, but that can be misleading. Terms like moderate are often used to describe centrist views and words like extreme, for off centre views, of right or left. I think people like to hedge their bets a bit by saying they are in the centre politically, also.

People’s view of what the centre in politics is can vary as well, but it is likely there is political space for some kind of centrist view, but what appears to be being suggested sounds very much like a pro-EU liberal establishment type party. This type of political view has taken a bit of a battering though in recent times.

The Lib Dems, an established, self styled centrist party, pro-EU too, did poorly at last year’s general election and are only polling around 7% at the moment. They did of course blot their copybook by entering a coalition with the Tories in 2010, and bear much responsibility for the situation we find ourselves in today.

£50 million can buy you a lot of publicity but any new party needs to put down roots and inspire activists at local level. This normally takes quite a long time to achieve though.

Comparisons have quickly been made with the Social Democratic Party (SDP) of the 1980s in the UK. After a blaze of publicity in the media, they got to 50% in the opinion polls at one stage, but finished up with only 23 Parliamentary seats, in the 1983 general election. By the end of the decade they had disbanded, after coming behind the Monster Raving Loony party at a by-election, except those who joined the then Liberal party, to form the Lib Dems.

The First Past the Post electoral system in the UK makes it very difficult for new parties to win representation, which was the fate of the SDP. Inspiration it seems is being taken from Emmanuel Macron’s victory in the French presidential election last year. He formed a new party, En Marche (Forward) pretty much from scratch, but he was known as a politician after serving in François Hollande's Socialist party government.

The Five Star Movement did very well in Italy’s recent general election and it was started by Beppe Grillo, a comedian only nine years ago. This party does seem to take from the left and right in terms of policies. En Marche, is basically a new Labour clone. Both these successes though have come about in more proportional electoral systems, which makes things a bit easier.

The centre of British politics shifted massively to the right when Margaret Thatcher became Tory party leader in the 1970s. The SDP manifesto for the 1983 general election was considered centrist at the time, but was similar to what the Labour party offered at last year’s general election, and was labelled ‘far left.’

My bet is that this new centrist party doesn’t get off the ground, but let’s not be fooled it is centrist only in relation to the neo-liberal consensus. In most respects, it is a right wing ideological grouping, and we have plenty of them around already.

Will a New Political Centre Party be Formed in the UK?

This really is a news story that will not go away. Ever since Jeremy Corbyn was elected Labour Party leader, but especially since after he was re-elected to the post last year, there has been a constant drip, drip of speculation, of a breakaway ‘centre left’ party being formed.

This week, the story was re-ignited by a tweet from James Chapman, a former aide to Brexit Secretary of State, David Davis, and ex Daily Mail political editor. The text of the tweet @jameschappers was:

“Past time for sensible MPs in all parties to admit Brexit is a catastrophe, come together in new party if need be, and reverse it.”

He later tweeted it was “well past time for sensible journos on papers that supported Brexit to admit it is going to destroy lives of many of their readers.”

As this suggests, the main issue that might unite elements of the Labour right and Tory left (such that it is), together with the Lib Dems, is Brexit.

On the original tweet, Chapman copied in Remain-sympathising MPs Chuka Ummuna (Labour), Vince Cable (Lib Dem), Anna Soubry (Tory), Nicky Morgan (Tory), Rachel Reeves (Labour), Nicholas Soames (Tory), Pat McFadden (Labour) and Stella Creasy (Labour).

Who might we add to this list? In Parliament, other Blairite Labour MPs and Europhile Tories, like Chris Leslie and Ken Clarke, and peers Like Lord Mandelson and Lord Heseltine. Perhaps the Scottish Tory Party leader Ruth Davidson?

Outside of Parliament, Tony Blair ex Labour Prime Minister, ex Labour Foreign Secretary, David Miliband and Nick Clegg, former leader of the Lib Dems. And what about the former Tory Chancellor, George Osborne? Chapman was previously an aide to Osborne when he was Chancellor, who now edits the Evening Standard. He has used this position to attack the Tory government, especially over Brexit.

Chapman has even suggested a name for the new party, ‘The Democrats’. The New Statesman revealed back in June this year, that Osborne had approached the then Lib Dem leader, Tim Farron and some Labour MPs, after the Brexit vote, with this idea, and with the same suggested name. Might Chapman be the front man for Osborne here?

But will this new party ever actually happen? I think the chances are against it. The fate of the break away party from Labour in the 1980s, the Social Democrat Party (SDP), is still fresh in the minds of many MPs, particularly Labour ones. After a brief spike in the opinion polls (polling at around 50%), the party dwindled and merged with the then Liberal Party to form the Lib Dems.

Some point to the victory of Emmanuel Macron in the French presidential election this year, on an unambiguously centre ground ticket. But Macron only got 23% of the vote in the first round of the election, and only won so easily in the second round because his only opponent was the far right Marine Le Penn. His new party did though win the most seats in Parliament.  

It is highly likely, given the First Past The Post electoral system in the UK, which makes it very difficult for new parties to break the old Tory/Labour duopoly, that this new party would suffer the same end as the SDP.

It is debatable whether being anti-Brexit is enough in itself to attract large numbers of voters, as the Lib Dems found at the recent general election, where they only made modest gains, despite being the main pro-EU party (in England anyway). Over 16 million people voted to stay in the EU, but the Lib Dems only got less than two and a half million votes. Many Remain voters backed Labour, but Labour fudged the issue of Brexit somewhat, but that can’t last forever.

One thing the new party might do though, like the SDP did, is split the anti-Tory vote, and make it impossible for Labour to win. When Blair came up with his New Labour Party idea in the 1990s, it was accepted in the party mainly because, hindered by the SDP, Labour had lost four general elections in a row. The Blairite’s might see this as the only way they will pull the Labour Party to the political right, or ‘centre ground’ as they see it.

Why young French voters won’t vote (and why they should)

Written by Tatiana Serova and first published at Politico

PARIS — Ni Patrie, Ni Patron. Ni Le Pen, Ni Macron. The words appeared in graffiti and painted on posters in the streets of Paris the day after the first round of the presidential election. Unable to hide their anger and despair, hundreds of Parisians went down to Place de la République. There, they burned electoral cards and French flags, claiming to no longer recognize their country and its democratic values. “Where is democracy if a far-right candidate makes it to the second round?” asked a young girl, who had covered her face with a scarf and waved a communist flag. I wondered, for a moment, how we got here. How did the definition of democracy get so narrow among my peers?

For those of us voting for the first time, the first round of the election, on April 23, was a long-awaited opportunity to express our opinions and be involved in the political life of our country. And we had a wide range to choose from. The election’s 11 candidates spanned the spectrum of French politics. But the result, for many of us, was a blow.

We couldn’t claim to be surprised, but we nonetheless came to class the next day with bitter faces and knots in our stomachs. Marine Le Pen, a far-right nationalist, had obtained close to the same level of support as Emmanuel Macron, a centrist candidate considered by many to be in thrall to the banks and a continuation of the status quo. Their rivals on both sides of the spectrum, but especially on the left, had been thrown out of the game.

In this tense climate, there’s the risk of massive abstention, especially among the youth. Social networks have played a major role in the emergence of this trend; the hashtag #SansMoiLe7mai (“Without me on May 7,” the date of the second round runoff) went viral on Twitter on election night. A Facebook event called for anyone feeling unsatisfied with the first round result to join a march against the Le Pen and Macron.

These protest movements were mainly launched by far-left activist groups, such as “Ungovernable Generation” or “Inter-fight Independent movement” (MILI), and most people taking part in them are left-leaning and young (many of them voted for the leftist candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon in the first round). They call themselves “The Disobedient.” The protestors believe in the need for deep structural change, an end to the Fifth “hyper-presidential” Republic and the restoration of social justice. They paint themselves as a bastion of resistance against a choice imposed upon them.

Neither candidate represents them, they say. Mélenchon and Le Pen might share similar policy proposals — both have populist messages, a similar stance on Europe and an adversarial relationship with mainstream media — but for the Disobedient, it’s Mélenchon or nothing. Macron, widely expected to defend the interests of the governing bureaucratic elite, is not a viable option either.

Supporters of former conservative candidate François Fillon have also threatened to stay silent on May 7. These largely middle-class voters pay the largest share of taxes and are attached to principles of meritocracy and economic liberalism. Although they have not been as active on the streets as their leftist counterparts, young Fillon defenders denounced the outcome of the first round, accusing the media of discrediting the candidature of all right-wing politicians, even if they are more popular.

The reports of the scandal that sank Fillon’s campaign, they argue, were released with the sole purpose of eliminating him from the race. To them, Macron is too “socialist” and Le Pen is too extreme.

By refusing to cast their vote, young French abstainers hope to sway the final outcome. If turnout is low, the result won’t be fully representative, and the elected president will lack legitimacy. Perhaps there is some logic to their argument, but to me, and many of my peers, their solution reflects nothing but laziness and resignation.

Of course, there’s something romantic in barricades and revolutionary songs. But what are the Disobedients really proposing? How do they expect to be taken seriously if they don’t take a constructive, proactive approach to political change? By abstaining, they are shrugging off not their precious right to universal suffrage but any responsibility for the outcome of their decision. The truth is that, even in not voting, they will be contributing to the victory of one candidate or the other. Indeed, large-scale abstention would favor a Le Pen victory.

Fortunately, however, not all young people share this vision. Many recognize that the “neither-nor” position is hypocritical. This vote is not about choosing between Scylla and Charybdis, it’s a question of responsibility. We have the opportunity to make things change, in one way or another, by not yielding to the temptation of indecision and cynicism. If we don’t vote, we’ll have only ourselves to blame. If French youth care about democracy, they can’t give up on politics.

Tatiana Serova is a student at the Paris Institute of International Relations.

French Election - Jean-Luc Mélenchon Competes with Marine Le Pen for the 'Popular Classes'

This is an edited French to English Google translation of a piece first published at BFMTV. Jean-Luc Mélenchon is a former co president of the ecosocialist Parti de Gauche.

Mélenchon is the candidate of France insoumise (unsubmissive France) which is a wide ranging coalition of left and green parties and political groupings in France. 

Jean-Luc Mélenchon continues to climb in the opinion polls while Marine Le Pen has been declining for several weeks. The latter is now worried by the candidate of the "France insoumise", Jean-Luc Mélenchon. At the Figaro debate this Monday, the president of the National Front made the candidate of "rebellious France" alternately "an immigration champion", a candidate likely to levy "an additional 100 billion euros in tax" or a candidate who "a little, like Philippe Poutou, fucks the French ."

The timing of these attacks is not insignificant. Marine Le Pen began attacking her rival, who is polling third in opinion polls, as he started getting closer to her in these polls. 

Mélenchon can hope to qualify for the final round now, to the detriment of Le Penn, in this month's presidential election.

After having siphoned off the support of the candidate nominated by the Socialist Party, Benoît Hamon, can Jean-Luc Mélenchon divert a significant number of voters from Marine Le Pen?

With Jean-Luc Mélenchon's progression among young people and workers, according to Eddy Fougier, a political scientist and researcher associated with IRIS, Marine Le Pen has good reason to worry:

"We know that Marine Le Pen usually scores quite high with some young people, though it maybe not be the same young people who have flocked to Mélenchon, but they do compete for this audience. Indeed, according to an Elabe poll for Les Echos, Jean-Luc Mélenchon is the preferred candidate of the 18-24 age group, with 29% of voting intentions in his favour from this audience.

Another Elabe poll, delivered last Wednesday, this time for BFMTV, had indicated a tremour in another part of the electorate. It looked at voting intentions by socio-professional category, and observed that Jean-Luc Mélenchon got 18% of white collar voters and 20% among blue collar voters (a three-point increase since the end of March for the latter section of population). Of course, Marine Le Pen remains largely ahead in these sections of the electorate (33% white collar, 39% blue collar) but it is declining.

At the end of March, she gathered 45% of the blue collar vote according to an investigation by same institute. "There is competition between Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Le Pen for these voters but it is limited, because for the 'popular electorate,' especially the blue collar workers, the themes of Islam and immigration weigh heavily in this election. Even a limited progression of Jean-Luc Mélenchon in this sector of the population can count though, says Eddy Fougier recalling that "in 2012, Jean-Luc Mélenchon did not score so well amongst the workers."

Humanism and "degagism" (casualism)

This crescendo in support for the representative of "France insoumise" in the popular classes can be explained in various ways. "Jean-Luc Mélenchon captures a part of the anti-establishment feeling, the desire to try something other than Marine Le Pen's radicality", describes the political scientist who continues: "In a sense, Jean-Luc Mélenchon has two advantages that can appeal both to a category of young people and to a part of the working class world. He has the advantage presented by Emmanuel Macron, that is to say, in short, a humanist logic, and the advantage presented by Marine Le Pen's radicality." Not to mention that these young and active members of the popular classes could be tempted by "the Melenchonian degagism", adds Fougier.

Finally, the social shift made by Le Pen as new president of the National Front from 2011 and its Euroscepticism could be about to be pre-empted by the candidate supported by the Communist Party:

"The National Front has said that we should prefer the original to the copy, in terms of the criticism of capitalism and liberal Europe. On these subjects, Jean-Luc Mélenchon is likely to appear as more credible," Fougier says.

And if ... they both qualify for the final round of the election? We should maybe not jump to the conclusion of thinking that Mélenchon will eliminate Le Pen in the first round. The uncertainty of the electorate tossed about by a campaign made worse by the affairs and counter-balances of the primary on the left, and general economic gloom could well serve the two contenders with so different profiles:

"When looking at the economic and social situation and what the French say, most say that things will get worse before they get better. In which case, a second round, between Marine Le Pen and Jean-Luc Mélenchon is conceivable. This would be an unprecedented scenario for the radical left to bear the standard of the left (and centre right?) and to go up against the far right for the Presidency," concludes Fougier.

The first round of the French Presidential election is on 23 April.