Professor of sociology Shmuel Trigano believes that the collapse of the party system of France is associated with a dominant ideology that blurs the boundaries in the political sphere, and obsolete his criticism of NetFront.
There is something systematic in the collapse of the French party system, which emerged as a result of the dominant postmodern ideology today (I wrote about her in 2012 in the book “the New dominant ideology: postmodernism”). I recall that in sociological terms, one of the main properties of the dominant ideology is that it is not perceived as such, and confuse it with the existing reality and system of values.
There’s no “inside” nor “outside”
One of the main features of this ideology is to reject the national forms of collective existence and, consequently, the sovereignty of the state. It draws the perspective of the end of national entities and borders, that is, the principle which was the key to modern democratic world, but has been undermined by the unification of Europe. I guess the chaos in the current election campaign is a direct result of the promotion of this ideology, which could be described as “postmarxism”.
The principle of the border, there are lines between what is inside and what is outside, it makes sense not only in international relations but also from the standpoint of the attitude to yourself, whether for one person or group of people. It is inextricably linked with the existence of any education, because that must be the limit. The democratic regime in which the sovereign people are the source of power of laws, has its own “inside” and “outside”. Inside is a team of people who form a sovereign entity because of the “contract”. Outside is other sovereign entities. In addition, the contract itself, presupposes the existence of “inside” and “outside” the established political system. Thanks to this distinction, the political authority is a coherent and rational system.
In fundamental to democratic theory treatise “the social contract” Rousseau wrote: “It is a legal person, formed thus by combining all the others, once was called the Civil community, now called the Republic, or the Political body: its members called the Political body State when it is passive, Sovereign when it is active, Power when comparing it with others like him. As to the members of the Association, they collectively receive the name of people and severally are called citizens, as participating in the Supreme authority, and subjects as obeying the laws of the State.”
Primary field of postmodernism
In our case, the postmodern rejection of this necessary for the existence of any educational principle indirectly proved from the primaries, which was served as if passed at the national level, although is actually carried out in the party framework. Although it was about the primaries of specific parties, they were open to voters from other camps. For example, in the primaries of the right-wing socialists could vote against Nicolas Sarkozy. The difference between party “inside” and “outside” has disappeared. Electorates, parties and electoral tasks mixed up. Primaries (especially at right) was organized as a kind of national election, which as a result lost their meaning before beginning. Objectively Fillon was elected by universal suffrage, albeit in the framework of a particular party. Such invalidation of a national election, by the way, combined with the endless interviews to the media, which constantly closes.
© AFP 2017, Thomas Emoprincess politician Francois Fillon
In addition, before us today in all its glory appears another decisive component of the collapse of a democratic political system. The place policy is now not the County, the state and citizenship, and television Studio. This field is not a national, and public, private and hidden biased. It is in the hands of money and spheres of influence and became one of the favorite scenes of postmodernism, as the experience of the past 20 years. Thus, the media began to establish order in election debates, to identify the news of the day and the main topic of discussion, to classify the interviewees based on the results of surveys that they themselves bought (and therefore guide), before the direct vote of the electorate. On the TV channel BFM has reached the point that began to call interviews “interviews!” The political field has disappeared.
The form of disintegration
The result of this collapse was not long in coming, and is manifested systematically. Both the left and the right, natural leaders (Hollande and Sarkozy) came out fighting, despite the media hornblende (Juppe from the right and Waltz among the left). Instead, the faux primaries led to the victory of candidates who hold extreme views in the political spectrum: to the right of Fillon, Juppe and Amon to the left of the Waltz. Whatever it was, behind bogus and elected candidates there were two unexpected figures, which short circuited the results organized by the primary. Two of the candidates (Jean-Luc Mélenchon on the left flank and the macron on the right), refused to accept these rules. Their appearance leads to an automatic rebalancing against the winners of the primaries, which represent extreme views, because voters parties had to take a tougher stance, not to give vent to defectors, are able to impose manipulative choice (for example, against Sarkozy).
There is no doubt that candidates who did not bend to the primaries, that is, macron, Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Le Pen, is best manifest themselves on the background of the collapse of the traditional parties and their candidates. Although, of course, for different reasons.
Ignoring the primaries macron and Mélenchon (they represent the kind of “liberal” and “socialist” parties) embody the same rejection of the nation: words and deeds have Rules and only a matter of Mélenchon, who is misleading everyone is oratorical talent and tone of old France (he’s an anarchist, as 50 years ago). The system can play only the leaders of this type in accordance with the collapse of the democratic regime. They are driven by one ideology (more from a systemic point of view, than in content), although in the case of Jean-Luc Mélenchon is readily apparent, the specter of Marxism.
In both cases the result is alarming, since these two candidates have to go only to the end of democracy under the guise of demagoguery of the left or of liberalism. Magic words of Jean-Luc Mélenchon, his street rallies and hologram paint the prospect of regime type in Latin America (except Mélenchon is not honoring Castro and Chavez does not protect?). As for the Macron, docile crowds at his meetings (they are satisfied with adhering to the propaganda methods of organization), “inspired” speaking style, tight from the chest fists and closed eyes (someone all it reminds!) — in the highest degree alarming. If to speak about prospects of these candidates, if elected, we will see the power of one person against the masses, since they will not stand any organized party (if only a hodgepodge of remnants of the traditional parties).
It remains to consider the case of the National front, who was not satisfied with the primaries and since Mitterrand plays a pivotal role in the political system that perfectly matches were analyzed by me and configuration is one of the consequences of this state of Affairs. We will remind, with what all has begun. In the quest to retain power, including within his own party, Mitterrand developed a cunning strategy of “anti-fascist front” against the threat of Le pen, which he actually fabricated for their own purposes. He wanted to get right into the vise and put them before a choice between “Republicans” (i.e., socialists) and fascists. He perfectly managed it, the right wing was shattered, however, by the explosion and touched his own party, which suffered from “green” and “frondeurs”. NetFront only strengthened over the years and has become a real force.
The current collapse was a direct consequence of this infernal machine, a symbolic time bomb. Alternating right and left now without end stumble on the stone of the NF, who could not come to power because of the system, thereby ensuring both its success and inevitable failure. So, apparently, if marine Le Pen to the second round, where she did not Shine: the other candidate would get a vote only in the peak of her, not because of his program. Obviously, the left will vote for anyone but not for Le Pen.
Whatever it was, it is likely that in the long term, Mitterrand formed a mechanism will lead the PF to power, as from the point of view of logic system this may be the only way to bring France out of the impasse into which it has driven itself. In the past the election of Nicolas Sarkozy could propel us to the exit from the vicious circle, if he actually followed politics, for which he was chosen… Fillon also represents an alternative to this type. The fact that in the system plan the solution lies to its right. Do not forget that the strategy of the anti-fascist front were sent to crush them, hamstring the right-wing and disgust (because of “fascism”) to fundamental values.
Reaffirm those values in the Republic, means to undermine the monopoly of NF on them in the era of postmodernism. It becomes clear why the proponents of this ideology have decided to cut the ground from under the feet with the dispersal of the candidate from the right that will memorize and later clarify political history. The election of Fillon by a wave of popular support paved the way for restructuring dmitriyevskiy system. Maybe it’s still possible, although the Makron, and now Mélenchon reinforce the idea of the duel between Le Pen and “the System”, according to the NetFront, system, the core of which he himself is.
After a few days we will be clear will of the electorate in favour of sovereignty to reassert itself.