Trying to understand what led Emmanuel Macron to the dissolution of the National Assembly will occupy historians and political science specialists for a long time. However, it is likely that, thinking it was inevitable in the long term, he preferred to provoke it rather than suffer it because of the tabling of a motion of censure by the right.
Behind the big declarations on the need to “give back the voice to the people”his decision is also based on a strategic bet that everyone, including in his own camp, has described as, if not crazy, at least quite risky.
Thinking of bringing together a broad “republican front” by expanding his majority, brandishing the threat of chaos and relying on the camp of “reason”, he hoped, helped by the voting method of the legislative elections, to obtain the majority which he had lacked since then. 2022. However, he is on the verge of losing his bet since two essential conditions for the success of such a strategy are no longer met.
The Economic Alternatives newsletter
Every Sunday at 5 p.m., our breakdown of the week’s news
On the one hand, it assumed the inability of the left to find its way back to union after European elections during which the latter had been torn apart over geopolitical questions (Ukraine, Gaza) and, to a lesser extent, over his degree of attachment to the European project, all against a background of political considerations concerning the leadership of the left. However, faced with the democratic emergency, the left and the ecologists have succeeded in building a pact, that of the “Popular Front”.
On the other hand, a section of the right-wing Les Républicains (LR) chose to join the far right, attracted by “the smell of soup” and pushed by part of its electorate.
Three blocks, including that of hope
Whatever the case, in doing so, Emmanuel Macron will have precipitated the recomposition of the French political landscape, latent for many years, and its tripartition between the extreme right/extreme right bloc, that of the left and that which he intends to embody.
It is certainly possible that he will succeed in attracting some left-wing or environmentalist officials and voters who do not want an agreement with La France insoumise, either because of the geopolitical questions mentioned above, or because of the personality of Jean- Luc Mélenchon or the strategies used in the hemicycle, or even because, concerning economic policy, they share the main lines of the supply policy and the objective of “recovery of public accounts”. Not to mention the questions of secularism and security which have also divided the left for many years.
Certainly, also, a part of the right, faithful to the Republican and Gaullist heritage, will be honored by its refusal of an alliance with the extreme right and will perhaps choose to join it. However, this risks being of little weight in the face of the detestation now aroused by Emmanuel Macron and his supporters, in the face of the dynamic created by the hope of unity on the left, and unfortunately in the face of the steamroller of the rise of the extreme right.
And if the chosen angle of the campaign is, as its Prime Minister says, “on the one hand the choice of KO. financial and social, and opposite the choice of stability and construction”it is a safe bet that he will fail to embody the force that resists the arrival of the extreme right to power.
One of the conditions for the success of the left is to succeed in rekindling hope
It is therefore on the left that this immense responsibility falls. One of the conditions for the success of the latter is to succeed in creating hope again. This seems like a conventional formula, but it is actually essential. Indeed, one of the main drivers of the vote in favor of the National Rally, as we know, is despair and disillusionment, anxiety in the face of the challenges of the moment and the feeling that, since the others have failed, we might as well “try ” the extreme right.
For this, economic policy questions are major. Although it is likely that they will not occupy the majority of public debates (even if, given recent developments on the markets, they risk quickly entering the campaign), they will nevertheless play a fundamental role in break those negative feelings.
He must therefore denounce the inconsistency of the economic policy proposed by the far right, which promises both a fiscal shock of tax cuts (on inheritance, for young people, for young entrepreneurs, on VAT , etc.) and new spending (notably on security and defense), while being obsessed with debt. It is an equation without a solution that the odious measures on immigration and “national preference” do not resolve in any way.
He must also explain that the vagueness which characterizes the economic project of the extreme right in reality masks a liberal policy which, in no case, will resolve the situation of all those who experience precariousness and economic difficulties. The recent renunciation of retirement at 60 announced by Jordan Bardella attests to this.
The need to convince
He must also convince us that we are in no way condemned to the economic policy carried out by Emmanuel Macron who, stuck to his dogmatic and ideological refusal of any tax increase, including for the greatest fortunes or superprofits, will be once again incapable of achieving the objectives of growth, employment and recovery of public accounts that it announces.
Indeed, returning below the 3% public deficit in 2027, as it aims to do, would require an 80 billion reduction in public spending, which would inevitably have recessive effects making the stated objectives unattainable, while giving rise to social consequences. terrible and by prohibiting major investments for the future, thus favoring the breeding ground on which the extreme right is progressing.
The left must convince that it can take strong measures on purchasing power, particularly for those on the lowest incomes.
The left must also convince that it can take strong measures on the purchasing power, in particular of the most modest, in particular via the revaluation of social minimums and the index point. It must convince that it can reduce wage inequalities, notably via a measure of wage gaps within the company, and, thanks to taxation, income and wealth inequalities, while improving the situation of young people with a basic income from the age of 18.
She must convince that she can reverse Emmanuel Macron’s most unfair measures (on unemployment insurance and retirement in particular), while ensuring the essential funding to get public services out of their current disarray (notably in the areas of health, education and research), as well as the public investments essential for the future (ecology, defense and digital transition).
It must convince that all this is possible, without losing control of budgetary balances.
This requires us not to exclude the reduction of certain public expenditure, for example by conditioning aid to businesses, by abandoning or reducing certain tax loopholes (research tax credit, the CIR, home help for the most fortunate), by trying to reduce the duplication of the millefeuille of local authorities and the State (recently estimated at more than 7 billion) or by reducing learning aid for students in major schools to redeploy it to young people who need it most .
This also requires the courage of an ambitious tax policy at the national and international level through the taxation of superprofits and superdividends, large fortunes and very large inheritances, through a tax on financial transactions.
It’s possible. This is essential. It’s urgent !
