Classic explanations, but insufficient
Various explanations have been put forward to account for this defeat.
We are talking about a fractured America, opposing cities and countryside, coasts and interiors. That’s right. I have reproduced below, as an example, the results from the states of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. I put next to it the map of the results in the first round of the French legislative elections on June 30, in the department of Vienne, where I live. We see that the cut is the same.
But this explanation is insufficient. Pennsylvania gave the majority to Joe Biden in 2020, with a voting structure that was the same. There was therefore an overall shift in the electorate.
In fact, Donald Trump won all the swing states and he also obtained the majority of votes cast across the entire electorate. It is therefore, undoubtedly, not the fringes most anchored in their positioning which made the difference, but the moderate votes.
It is also quite striking that, even where Kamala Harris campaigned: in the swing states and towards the moderate electorate, she encountered a systematic failure.
We are talking about a misogynistic vote. It’s true. But what Kamala Harris lost among men, she gained among women.
They say, finally, that the campaign was not good. Frankly I didn’t find it bad. She probably didn’t have the energy of Obama’s campaigns, but she was up to par.
In fact, a whole section of the moderate electorate has slid towards Donald Trump’s posture: his lies don’t matter as long as he gives us muscle.
Why are transgressive candidates successful?
In the past, I had already been struck by the re-elections of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy, when he had to manage an incredible number of problems. In recent years, we have seen that illiberal leaders, who claim conflict with the justice system, the press and everything that hinders their progress, are re-elected quietly, most of the time. Boris Johnson, in the United Kingdom, was successful for a long time, even though everyone knew he was constantly telling lies. In short, we have to get used to this idea: transgressive politicians are popular. And, in my opinion, they appeal, because they suggest that everything is possible, that we can ignore the facts, whatever limits they may be, and live in a world without constraints.
It is reassuring to ignore global warming, the fact that the earth has limited resources, that the oil civilization will die out, that people suffer from asymmetrical economic relations, and that we are supposed to behave with other human beings whoever they may be with a minimum of humanity.
A general shift of the electorate to the right
It is reassuring to ignore it… while knowing it very well despite everything. Moreover, it is undoubtedly this awareness that humanity is collectively coming up against limits which is gradually causing populations, all around the Earth, to enter into a logic of war.
Many count on their government to protect them against those who would like to take a piece of the pie: immigrants who we would like to see stay at home, enemy nations, or, simply, people in poverty.
The shift to the right was clearly perceptible in the last European elections, in the majority of countries. And the left in France would do well to pay attention to it. She forgot this summer, after having obtained the relative majority in the assembly, that she only had 30% of the votes, which is very little.
Today, the most successful politicians rely on nationalism, distrust of multilateral international structures, and a virtually limitless faith in the resources of the balance of power to face virtually any social problem.
A rising wave that will eventually cause major explosions
I see, year after year, this belief in the virtues of force gaining increasingly large shares of the electorate. The fact that Donald Trump had more votes than in his first election, where he created a surprise, is another example of this.
This is, for me, the exact opposite of everything I believe in. I say it this way to show that we are touching on a spiritual issue. This cult of force is a form of paganism which resolutely turns its back on the teaching of Christ, even if many Christians give in to it. Society is made to build compromises, arbitrations, to arrange a minimum coexistence, in the midst of opposing interests. The balance of power is multiple, obviously, but the democratic rules are there, precisely, to limit their scope.
And if we dream of overturning the barriers and giving in without restraint to the intoxication of power, all this will end in major explosions and collective desolation.
We can’t do much about this strong trend. But we can at least remain true to our belief in the virtues…well let’s just say love of neighbor! This old idea that I find more and more current these days! Wherever people decide to cooperate and help each other rather than suspect, jealous, and protect themselves from others, there is hope and life.
