According to the latest survey of the French Institute of public opinion of marine Le Pen remains a matter of concern to the vast majority of the French. This applies to democratic values, economic proposals and the future of international relations of France.
Atlantico: the national front is still a concern people: if you believe the latest poll of the French Institute of public opinion (IFOP), marine Le Pen “nastorajivaet” 55% of the French. But can we consider NF anti-democratic party, in terms of values?
Loecker Erwan (Erwan Lecoeur), a senior official ofthe national front is not itself anti-democratic party, rather the opposite. In some ways, it even creates an image of sverkhtekuchesti and claims to be respectful of all refers to the word of the people who today do not duly represented in the National Assembly and other bodies. In addition, with the suggestion that regular use of the referendum, it represents itself as an alternative to the confiscation of power by the elite and the troubles that allowed the ruling class, that is, first and foremost, immigration and globalization.
Anyway, in terms of governance, the national front has always been and remains fundamentally autocratic party, both from the point of view of internal work and in his approach to power. He offers peculiar form of government in the name of the need for change and radical orientation of some of its proposals (in particular, in the social sphere). In the 1980s, the national front emphasized the successes of several countries like Chile’s Pinochet, where it was rigidly ruled by the leaders concentrated power in the hands of a select few.
Behind the rhetoric of people power at many levels is viewed a political vision in which France is much more closer with the regime of Vladimir Putin in Russia and Donald trump in the US or even the Hindu nationalists than with the European and French democratic tradition. This is the case with most populist and nationalist regimes which rank people on the “religious-ethnic” basis (India, USA) and trying to solve the problem of direct and precise way in the name of efficiency. NF follows the same line of thought, and democracy for him is a way of coming to power.
Francois Martin (François Martin), a sociologist: NF, of course, is not anti-democratic party. As far as I know, he does not propose to replace democracy or even a Republic in some other mode. From this point of view, it is much more democratic than the Communist party during the cold war. In addition, he defends unacceptable for democratic values like racism, anti-Semitism and hatred of foreigners. Finally, NF is not proposing to abolish the constitutional unit of the Declaration of 1789 and other principles that underlie the jurisprudence of the constitutional Council. All they are above the laws and would remain in force even in the case of the election of marine Le Pen.
For decades NF wrongly represented part of the political class and many of the media as a racist party, the heir of the Nazis, which will bring us back to “the darkest hours of our history” and poses a threat to democracy and the Republic. This “demonization”, which, I must say fueled some criminal antics of Jean-Marie Le pen (Jean Marie Le Pen), is the direct cause of strengthening of the NF. Forbidding himself to raise some of the topics and to propose certain measures under the sole pretext that it could be close to the positions NF, we left him the monopoly of the opposition on issues such as immigration, insecurity, Islam, and European construction. If these issues were discussed, and not be imposed a uniform approach, the PF could not have risen so high. It should say that is undemocratic, that the party which represents at least 20% of the population so poorly represented in Parliament. This situation only reinforces gartenschau and anti-system position natsfronta.
The question of “values” is more difficult because this concept can be many meanings, which, moreover, change with time. NF obviously doesn’t share the values that are put forward by the left and the support of the most part right: a happy globalization, the positive perception of immigration, more Europe and less borders, etc. anyway, people should not necessarily find yourself in these values and may be guided by other kind of patriotism and national sovereignty without becoming the enemy of democracy and the Republic. Here again, the visible commitment of the left (with the consent of a large part of the right) to enforce a uniform thinking, which “plays into the hands” of the NF.
– To what extent should we fear the economic program of NetFront, and by what means he could use to implement pre-election promises?
Erwan Loecker: Economy has always been a weakness of the party. First there was the ultra-liberal era, when Jean-Marie Le Pen admired Reagan and Pinochet, then in the PF was dominated by the liberal-nationalist views, and now marine Le Pen raises social issues, in some cases, picking up the threads left about the need for state protection. Such a mixture sometimes gives amazing results that many economists believe are incompatible and inconsistent. In addition to the rejection of the Euro, which raises serious questions, in terms of savings and trust at the international level, most of the proposed measures could not be realized in practice without significant tax increases. At the same time, the program involves tax cuts and deductions. In addition, in the economic program of NF, there are a number of gaps and important statements that can show, using General arguments about Patriotic capitalism. We also see the spirit of the time borrowing from the ecological theories and ideas for local consumption. At the same time, the NF continues to support the dirty industries if they are French, sustain employment and GDP.
Francois Martin: the NF Economic program is a real hodgepodge, which, incidentally, is not so far from the proposals of Jean-Luc Mélenchon (Jean-Luc Mélenchon), which has also seen a sharp turn. It is necessary to emphasize two points.
First of all, in economic terms, the NF program will be the most difficult to implement. For example, protectionism or exit from the Eurozone cannot be implemented by only one decision of the President. Need laws and their adoption by Parliament. To achieve this will be the hardest. Even in the case of the election of marine Le Pen President, it is doubtful that she will be able to form a government based on the majority of NF in Parliament. Without a parliamentary majority, the government cannot govern and to take decisions calmly. That is, it is not possible to implement economic policies, particularly if that goes against the current at the moment of legal restrictions.
The second point follows from the first question. Protectionism and the Euro — forbidden topics. The United States and China can engage in protectionism, and in Europe, and France no right to it. As for the Euro, we are in danger of the Apocalypse in the case. Although during the accession was promised Paradise, so a certain logic in all this. Instead of emotional cries of the policies should be clear and to demonstrate on the basis of figures and economic theories that may occur in the event of a failure of the Euro.
– Whether there are real grounds for concerns about marine Le Pen at the geopolitical level? By what means it might use to implement his program?
Erwan Loecker: At the international level, the front national remains committed to the strength and deterrence at any cost. His perception is akin to the French colonial Empire, which grew, Jean-Marie Le Pen and many of his friends. Preserved from the time the image of the France of the conqueror still serves as the basis for the geopolitical views of the party and most of its leadership. The result is a militaristic approach to relations between the countries and the call to greatness and power, even if it can lead to the worst. In addition, the current international chaos creates fertile ground for militant rhetoric, which rises in the leadership of the great powers from Putin to trump. The leaders of the National front do not hide their proximity to both presidents, as well as their risky positions in international environment. This applies to NATO, modernization of these countries and the rejection of Europe in the defence plan. If to depart from the policy positions and electoral strategy, the NF carries with it the seed of a possible change of geopolitical doctrines on European level in case of his coming to power in France. Incidentally, this is why some people have suspicions about the influence of some foreign powers on the national political game.
François Martin: I’m amazed at the infantile political debate on these issues, assuming that there is a debate. NATO is still appropriate structure to protect Europe? What should be the military plans for Europe? Should France maintain nuclear forces? What is the true operational level of the French army, and what should be its objectives? All these are difficult questions that no one now seriously discusses. In fact, we have now no strategy, which would imply the definition of enemies (and threats), preparation of their graduation and the development of means to counter them. The question is not whether Putin is good or bad. It is necessary to perform the role of France and Europe in the international game, trying to consider the prospect of a further five-year presidential term. The alarm should trigger in the first place, maintaining the current status quo, when nothing is solved and nothing is clear.
– Marine Le Pen said that after the election to hold a referendum on withdrawal from the Eurozone and removes from office in case of victory of “no”. What consequences this could bring in terms of management?
Erwan Loecker: This is one of the strategies that first year developed into the National front. It is not about trying to impose a political vision, and the style approach to leadership, which gives the impression that the government of the NF is in close conjunction with the French people. The referendum on the Euro, without a doubt, would be preceded by a campaign and debate about Europe and the need to return France to its former glory. In the background it is seen that under the gun was the disintegration of Europe, which would allow other great powers to take world leadership, not for fear of impeding the EU. Plans Le Pen go where on the new Breccia: leaving the Euro and “Fixit” would mean the end of the EU and its place in the international arena.
From a purely political point of view, the promise to govern through referendum could be a double-edged sword. It is a populist version of democratic governance, creating the risk of referendums on issues that could divide the country and lead to severe social division. This may relate to the death penalty, defense policy, immigration. Another useful aspect of this application is that it gives the NetFront democratic gloss, which also forms a reference to Gaullism and the referendum of 1969.
Francois Martin: the Promise of leaving power in case of failure in the referendum, seems logical, if we assume that an exit from the Eurozone poses a major motivation for potential election Le Pen. But I don’t think so. Most likely, the majority of Fn voters and voters in General, not much to do with the Euro: where they are more concerned about purchasing power, unemployment, insecurity and the future of their children. In any case, a referendum is the only appropriate solution on this issue from the point of view of democracy. Only need to him was a serious preparation with the assistance of impartial and high-quality debate, but nothing like we have not yet seen.
Anyway, all this is the greatest danger in the state plan. If marine Le Pen wins, will organize a referendum and lose it, it would mean new elections and a new campaign. That is causing considerable concern, judging by the level of the current!
