Jimu news reporter Sun Zhe
On April 24, local time, the second round of voting was held in the French general election. The "final showdown" will take place between incumbent President Macron and le Pen, the candidate of the far-right "National Alliance", Macron or Le Pen? This outcome is crucial for the entire Western world.
On the afternoon of April 23, Jimu News reporters contacted Ding Chun, director of the European Affairs Center of Fudan University and professor of the EU Jean-Monnet Chair, to make a detailed interpretation of the French election.
Le Pen and "de-radicalization"
Pole News: Compared to Macron, people may not be so familiar with Le Pen. After succeeding her father, Le Pen Sr., at the helm of the National Front, she began what the media called "de-demonization," constantly downplaying the ultra-rightist color and gradually pushing it from a fringe party to the mainstream. Can you interpret Le Pen's "whitewashing" of the party?
Professor Ding Chun: Le Pen was born into a political family, and from an early age, he was quite interested in politics. In 2011, after she succeeded the elder Le Pen as the leader of the "National Front", she began the road of "de-radicalization", in fact, this series of actions is both softening and hardening.
Le Pen Infographic (Source: Reuters)
The so-called softening is mainly reflected in the downplaying of her father's "anti-Semitic" and anti-racial extreme image, especially after the elder Le Pen made provocative remarks about World War II and aroused strong condemnation, Le Pen decisively cut and broke with his father. Formally, she changed the "National Front" to the "National Union" and led her party in gradually moving closer to mainstream society.
The so-called hardening refers to Le Pen's claims such as anti-immigration, warnings of the threat of Islamic terrorism, defending so-called national sovereignty, defending the relevant legal order, and especially defending so-called economic protectionism. Like the proposal to ban Muslim women from wearing headscarves in public places mentioned in Wednesday's televised debate, she has not softened on these issues, but has hardened it, but has been very vocal.
At the same time, it should also be noted that although Le Pen has now downplayed the plans made in 2017 for France to leave the European Union and exit the euro area, she is stressing that if elected, it may make domestic law higher than EU law. So we can't just look at some of the superficial things that are so-called softening, including what she said earlier that she would emulate de Gaulle to get France out of NATO.
In order to realize his dream of becoming france's first female president, le Pen played the slogan "France should be the France of the French" in order to attract voters. She is called the "Trump of France", which is actually related to this. Many of her fans are blue-collar workers and whites with financial constraints.
Coupled with the current situation of "fragmentation" of mainstream political parties in France, Le Pen's "National Alliance" is now more influential than it was in 2017. But even so, public opinion still generally believes that in the second round of voting, the probability of reproducing the results of the previous 2017 general election is larger.
The election enters the sprint
Extreme News: In the 2017 French presidential election, although Le Pen reached the second round, he finally lost to Macron by a big score, do you think that in this French election, Le Pen is closer to victory than 5 years ago? How do you think the two are working?
Professor Ding Chun: This is an obvious point, and we can analyze it from two aspects. On the one hand, Le Pen's rival Macron, compared to when he first ran in 2017, his overall impression in the minds of the French people is that there is a point of loss.
Macron 5 years ago, compared with Sarkozy on the right and Hollande on the left, was a "neither left nor right" centrist, and such a young and promising image in the name of change captured the hearts of the French.
Macron's 5 years in power should be regarded as mixed. On the one hand, economically, he has launched a series of reform measures in a big way, and he has also received many results. The most obvious is the growth of the French economy, which even under the impact of the epidemic, grew by 7% last year, even faster than germany, known as the "locomotive of Europe".
However, the gap between the rich and the poor within France is still widening, and in the context of the European debt crisis, there is a group of people in France who are quite dissatisfied with the social gap between rich and poor brought about by globalization. Therefore, Macron's reform is actually the "cheese" that has moved a lot of people. He himself admits that he has not done a very good job on the issue of purchasing power, which is also a point that Le Pen has been saying recently.
Macron Infographic (Source: Associated Press)
Movements like the "Yellow Vest" illustrate this problem. So, we can see now that some voters say, I'm definitely not going to choose Le Pen, but I don't want to choose Macron, in fact, for Macron, there is a certain point reduction for Macron.
On the other hand, Le Pen has been "demonizing" since she took the helm of the National Front, constantly moving closer to the mainstream public opinion society, including the issue of the purchasing power of the French people now. And there is another reason, because Le Pen is constantly leaning toward the middle, and Zemur is "more right" than her, then in contrast, the French people will feel that Le Pen is not so "right", which is equivalent to a displacement.
It's like a sports game, removing a top score and removing a minimum score, so that Le Pen's party is getting closer and closer to the mainstream. In that sense, even if she loses this election, I believe the gap between her and Macron will be smaller than it was 5 years ago.
Extreme News: In the TV debate on the evening of the 20th, in response to purchasing power, which is the most concerned issue of the French people, the two attacked each other for the incentives proposed by the other to increase wages and bonuses. Do you think Le Pen has previously promised to reduce the energy value-added tax from 20% to 5.5% and exempt young people under the age of 30 from personal income tax once elected?
Professor Ding Chun: At that time, it was said that 380 economists in France publicly expressed their position together, believing that it was not feasible for her to do this. First, Le Pen's plan as a whole, especially financially, is unsustainable. The essence of her policy is to please voters. Where do new spending come from? If there is no corresponding source of income, then it is a blank check.
Especially in this practice, it is necessary to increase taxes. Therefore, Le Pen's plan may not only increase the overall tax revenue, but also may have a negative impact on the purchasing power of French households. And it poses long-term risks to fiscal sustainability and does not necessarily benefit the poor.
In addition, from an intergenerational point of view, it is likely to increase the burden on future generations. Moreover, the exemption of all young people under the age of 30, as Le Pen mentioned, should be said to be almost unconstitutional. Because lawmakers will give priority to taxpayers, etc., the grant of immunity must be based on some so-called universal interest. Therefore, the application of such exemptions to certain groups alone may not be legally feasible.
So some plans like this may be more for the sake of votes. Especially after the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the whole of Europe was in a relatively turbulent period. Even if Le Pen is actually elected, it is doubtful that these plans will be implemented, and we must not only listen to the words of the candidates during the campaign, but also see whether these operations can be based on social realities.
Pole News: What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of Macron, who represents the centrist, in this election? Especially after the "yellow vest" movement and anti-retirement reform, how has Macron's camp changed compared to when he first ran?
Professor Ding Chun: As I just said, in the past 5 years, Macron has made a lot of achievements, handing over a "mixed" report card.
At home, Macron introduced tax reforms, promoted the optimization of the labor market, and also reformed the retirement system, which contributed to the vitality of the French economy, and compared with the previous two French presidents, the achievements are still relatively obvious.
Of course, Macron has also encountered "Waterloo", such as the "Yellow Vest" movement. In addition, France's current property deficit and public debt are also very high.
French people hold Le Pen's campaign poster (Source: Associated Press)
On the international stage, he has an advantage over Le Pen as a ruler. In the past 5 years since he came to power, especially before, he and former German Chancellor Angela Merkel formed the so-called "Merckron" combination, vigorously promoting "European strategic autonomy", deepening European integration, saying that NATO has been "brain dead", and pushing "European army", which is very useful for the French who advocate independence or pride in de Gaulle. Including in the fight against global climate change and the fight against the epidemic, he has also done a lot.
In this regard, he has accumulated a relatively good reputation, but as mentioned earlier, some French people are dissatisfied with the gap between purchasing power and rich and poor.
Speaking of disadvantages, facing the far-right Le Pen, because she put more emphasis on protecting the so-called "french self-interest", from the perspective of "protector", Macron has always been attacked by Le Pen. She would criticize Macron as the president of the rich, or that the gap between rich and poor is widening.
That for Le Pen, especially affected by the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, such as oil prices, natural gas and other prices directly related to people's livelihood are rising, in this context, it can be said that the two have their own advantages and disadvantages, mainly depending on how the French view this issue.
But I would like to emphasize that, in general, the vigilance of French society against the "far right", and its insistence on traditional "political correctness" like freedom, is largely in the interest of Macron. After all, I don't think even now Le Pen has been able to shake off her image as a relatively extreme policy or prescription spokesperson.
After the first round of elections, although the left like Mélang-sham itself is not united, they have one thing that is clear: I will not mobilize my voters to vote for Macron, but you must at least not vote for Le Pen. So, despite Le Pen's constant "demonization," until now, there is a relatively strong social consensus in French society, which I think still exists. Then this will eventually have a corresponding impact on the election results.
The European Union has been accused of trying to interfere in the French election
Pole News: According to Agence France-Presse, on April 21, local time, the leaders of Germany, Portugal and Spain called on the French people to support Macron and oppose Le Pen in the general election. Agence France-Presse (AFP) saw the move as a "highly unusual intervention" in the domestic politics of EU member states. What do you think about that?
Professor Ding Chun: This is actually not unusual in the EU, because the EU also has its so-called mainstream values. Like in previous Brexit referendums, the leaders of the countries concerned will emphasize on the one hand that it is your own voters, they have the right to decide freely, and I am not going to interfere with you; but on the other hand, they will also express their own ideas or propositions to exert influence indirectly.
If this is why this time is a "very unusual intervention", I think there are three reasons. First, this French election is very important for Europe in general and for the EUROPEAN Union in particular. The EU is at a very critical crossroads, especially after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, during which Le Pen was repeatedly questioned about his position against Russia. So if she is elected, it may greatly change the European Union and change the political ecology of the entire Western world, so this is why this election is very important.
Second, Le Pen is a much greater threat to Macron than in the previous election, as can be seen through the first round of voting and the results of previous polls. Coupled with some of Le Pen's views and remarks, it is contrary to the "political correctness" of mainstream European society, and she "dares to act". So, in this situation, in a way, she made the EU leaders nervous, or rather aroused their high attention.
Campaign poster for the French presidential candidate (Source: Associated Press)
Third, the calls by EU leaders are also highly correlated with the extent to which French society is now increasingly "divided.". Through this election, we can see that France and the whole European society are "torn" very badly, so every vote is very important.
Moreover, on the one hand, a series of crises such as the European debt crisis and the refugee crisis have actually shaken an economic foundation of European society, coupled with the superposition of the new crown epidemic and the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, resulting in soaring prices of energy and food, and inflation within society, which has caused supply chain tension and caused a certain impact on the lives of the French people.
A decline in consensus within French society has actually made the final vote more unpredictable than before, which may also make the gap between Macron and Le Pen narrower than before. Against this backdrop, it is possible that the leaders of the EU countries concerned are anxious to take a stand, or to some extent indirectly intervene in the French election.
For more exciting information, please download the "Jimu News" client in the application market, please do not reprint it without authorization, welcome to provide news clues, and pay as soon as you adopt it. 24-hour reporting hotline 027-86777777.