French Regionals 2010

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Urgh. Frêche is disgusting. Vote Communist! (lol)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Christ, the PS are doing badly. There's really no excuse for numbers like that when you're in opposition...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Christ, the PS are doing badly. There's really no excuse for numbers like that when you're in opposition...

Well, you know the PS. But the left is doing extremely well.

Well, yes. But you shouldn't be seeing this sort of left-fragmentation when the left is in opposition. Oh, but it's not a surprise. I think the PS just take matters to their logical conclusion and rename themselves SFIO.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Ah, so this is today. Excellent

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The turnout is very low and this isn't good for the democracy. This is maybe because the Regions haven't so much power  and many people think why should we vote for this powerless thing. But we see it in all countries in Europe that the turnout get lower.

I suspect that it's for the same sort of reasons that we have low turnouts (and lop-sided results) in local elections in Britain.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If regional elections in France now follow the pattern of local elections in Britain (and I think they do) then there aren't many national implications to be drawn from these results - as much as I'd like to think otherwise, obviously.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The language of French politics is very left-wing, yes. Post-Revolution it always has been. But we have to remember that language isn't reality, or rather, that it isn't the only reality. If we judged left-and-right by language alone, we have no choice but to consider SFIO to have been one of the most left-wing political organisations ever to actually win seats in a national legislature - an idea that is more than slightly absurd.

If we look at policy and the parties themselves, then the picture is much more mixed and depends (as is almost always the case) on individual conceptions of left and right. A Marxist (well, a real Marxist, anyway) would have no choice but to consider French politics to be remarkably right-wing for a country in the western half of Europe, while someone from the 'libertarian' Right would have equally little choice in branding it as remarkably left-wing. Someone interested in patterns of state intervention and welfare policies would mostly note paternalism above all else (at least since 1945), someone interested in elections and power structures would note entrenched conservatism with quixotic anti-establishment tendencies. And, I suppose, someone from a minority group would, presumably, be quite likely to take one look at 'racial' discourses in French society and politics and agree with the Marxist, though for totally different reasons.

But this feeds back into the issue of language, I think; though obviously not in the same way. My understanding of what it is to be on the Left is probably different to yours (whoever you happen to be), and yours will not be the same as the first person to read this post after you.

It is a quarter to three in the morning.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Come on... The way immigrants are viewed and dealt with isn't any longer a right/left criteria:

My point was that left-and-right are relative (or largely relative) concepts. Public attitudes to minority groups in France don't have to fit into the ritualised boxes of French political life to be viewed as right-wing (or whatever), especially as such a judgment would have more to do general discourses and casual racism than with formal protestations on 'immigrant' issues. I don't really share that point of view, but quite a few people do.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Similar comments can be made about almost every other country in 'Western' Europe, though with a different choice of examples in some cases (but not always). Though... the point about left-and-right being (in part) relative returns... I would certainly never view French agricultural policy (or its influence on overall European agricultural policy) as left-wing, and have difficulty accepting that there's something unusually left-wing about the French healthcare system or the way its funded, though (in both cases) you obviously do.

Personally, I'm not really sure if catagorising countries on left-right lines is especially useful, as there's too much going on and too many different (and conflicting) ways of looking at the issue (which is always the problem with abstractions).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Plaid Llydaw map is interesting. Reminds me, just a little, of electoral patterns somewhere else...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Lorraine is amazing. Marseille and surrounds too, actually. And three coalfield constituencies for the commie in Nord; not surprising (popular local deputy and all that) but interesting.

Oh, and Orne. Haha.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The PS cleaned up in the rural west and south - and most of the old industrial areas - which probably explains that. Also... concentration of support.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

No FN anywhere? Surprising to me.

Their vote is regionally concentrated but is not especially concentrated within regions (I'm using 'region' in a totally non-official sense of the word) with a few important hot spots. Le Pen led in a load of constituencies in 2002 but that was only because of massive fragmentation of the Left vote.

Actually, I think that's the usual pattern for far-right parties in 'Western' Europe these days.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The way the FN vote dances around never ceases to amaze... Paris is especially striking, but even Marseille is not what we've gotten used to...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Divers gauche (Georges Frêche)   53,5 %
UMP (Raymond Couderc)   27 %
Front National (France Jamet)   19,5 %

So, yeah.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yeah, planned towns often lack the... you know... of 'normal' towns. You can see it with the New Towns here.