The fallout from the French vote of “no” on the EU constitution includes a sign that Tony Blair may scrap plans to hold a similar referendum–which effectively kills, for now, the whole effort to create an overarching government charter.
The spin, which often has little to do with reality, is where it gets interesting. Did it represent a blow to the idea of liberalized markets in Europe? A rejection of centralization? Or was the whole event used by voters as a chance to punish the presidency of Jacques Chirac? No matter which interpretation you accept, the main problem remains: France’s bloated welfare state and regulated economy that is out of sync with modern times.
In an effort to appease the public sector workers (25% of the French workforce) and the leftist trade unions (all recipients of generous benefits and pensions), the moderate, supposedly “right-wing” President Chirac has come out with some pretty self-contradictory statements. Here is one excellent example:
“Liberalisme serait aussi desastreux que le communisme.” Quoted in Le Figaro, March 16, 2005
This translates to: “The free enterprise doctrine would be just as disastrous as communism.”
This weather vane action is not surprising. In spite of some very ambitious reform plans on the part of Chirac’s party and his ministers, France is still one of Europe’s best examples of a socialist quagmire. In reality, the Chirac government continues trying to spread equality as every French administration has done since DeGaulle.
Back in the 60s, the French began to have hopes of seeing their dream of a perfect society materialize. The government expanded control over the health system, the education system, the social security system, the transportation system (see their latest and most admirable splurge), the infrastructure system, the corporate and tax oversight systems, etc.
As marvelous state-run services began to increase, they were consumed; and because they were “free,” the people went on a binge. Each finally could plan on having the right to generous salary and vacation benefits, frequent doctor visits, support for unwed mothers (the numbers are on the increase – after all it’s a pretty well paid job), free child care, glorious retirement pensions, extensive public transport networks with supersonic trains, occasional sojourns in the company- or nationally-owned mineral bath spas, long state-paid years of higher education (whether or not they’re useful; for example, it is possible to get a doctorate on the physiological intricacies of the golf swing), etc.
Privileges began to pile up. Life was beautiful. Finally, equality seemed about to arrive – up to a point.
The only problem is, they don’t seem to have figured out that someone has to pay the bill. That someone turns out to be the diminishing number of wealthy people, and after them, those who are healthy and who still want to work to pay the increased taxes, and/or who can’t find an excuse to stop even though stopping is getting easier. All one needs is an obliging underpaid doctor, or perhaps an unemployment office accomplice who still believes in the gospel of solidarity and does as little as possible to propose a job “outside of one’s field,” or “incommensurate with one’s salary expectations,” or “away from home.”
Throughout the 80s and 90s, the financial crisis in France has been growing, and the line of collaborating pigs at the trough of this suicidal mission has become literally endless. The rich long ago began siphoning their income offshore, others hiding it through undeclared cash transactions on the black market – the only free market that is now thriving, as is the bureaucracy that polices it.
Employment opportunities continue to shrink as entrepreneurs are increasingly penalized and taxed. Recently, the government had the engenius idea to force the diminishing number of workers to agree to reduced pay for a lighter 35-hour workweek – “to help improve unemployment figures,” they said.
Anyone can understand why that law found little resistance. After all, who would want to waste valuable leisure time for so little net pay? Of course, the effort backfired, and the 35-hour workweek has begun to erode as French companies fall behind in European Union competition.
Meanwhile, the government continues to obscure labor statistics by encouraging many jobseekers to accept low paid and temporary dead-end “apprenticeship” positions, and to sign up for off-the-radar subsidized job training programs.
Today, paralytic tenure has set in on all fronts. Government receipts continue to shrink, and public debt has become chronic. Read here about how unions have become the blackmailing Mafiosi of French daily life.
Fortunately, public apathy cannot last forever. The good news is that even in France, there comes a point when reality begins to sink in, as it is trying to do now. Sensible voices are emerging, even if they have to put up with being arrested by Chirac’s secret service (see the article in a French magazine called VSD . The problem is that the growing number of public employees, state beneficiaries and unions have almost criminal control of the purse strings, and apparently even the sympathy of the public.
The punch line is that France is an excellent example of what America will be like in 20 years if we continue on our present path, and there won’t be any French vacations, cuisine or mud baths to soothe our aches and pains. Although France has been trying for the last few years to reign in socialist excess, they find themselves incapable of instituting the slightest reforms.
There is always some special interest group objecting to their excessive privileges being repealed and blackmailing the acquiescent public with the threat of national paralysis. The strikes are endless: the truckers union, the teachers union, the federal employees union, the once-nationalized electricity company’s union, the pilots’ union, the Force Ouvrière union (an old Communist relic), the CFDT, the CGT (both workers’ unions), and on and on it goes – and violence, both at these manifestations and elsewhere, is more and more commonplace.
As it stands, the various unions are now in cahoots to snub Chirac by defeating the European Union’s constitution vote, not out of fear of what is written in it, but of the effect ratification might have on their future perks and job security.
May France wake up before it is too late, and before we have to watch the bloody consequences splattered all over the news; and may America take heed and avoid the same destiny.
Just as in prewar Germany, and according to the scenario so clearly described by Hayek in The Road to Serfdom, the French must either collectively wake up and bite the bullet, or watch the nation collapse into fascism or revolution. France now seems paralyzed by political Locked-In-Syndrome, aware of the coming crisis but unable to do a thing about it.
{ 23 comments }
French liberal are here : http://www.liberte-cherie.com/forum.php?cat=10
No, LC is a french libertarian assoication.
It is a pity that “liberal” has completely different meaning in French and in English.
Vincent: You mean ‘in French & in _American_ English’. It’s also a great pity that Americans are _not_ aware of this — tho’ we all know the American definition, of course.
I may not be that familiar with the intricacies of the EU Constitution, but isn’t it just another unnecessary layer of state power? The beautifully ironic consequence of the whole thing is that socialists and fascists came together to defeat an expansion of government on the grounds that it was going to promote free markets! Maybe the French people are smarter than people give them credit for.
What is better, a superfluous layer of government that dismantles the state’s public sector, and perhaps leads the way to a freer Europe, or one less layer but more state monopolies?
The transit splurge mentioned above was apparently built without taxes.
Most of this article is good, but the comparison to prewar Germany at the end seems over the top. Unlike 1920s-30s Germany, modern France is not faced with a punative war debt nor depression and as importantly, nationalism and communism are relatively spent forces.
The point about modern France as an example of where the US is heading politically may be very apt.
I’m affraid that in US most of the scholars (and public opinion) don’t know the way european people think about these topics. As I lived in Europe, I may tell that the opposition to a UE Constitution means a reject to the way Chirac and other leaders (Blair and Schroeder, for sure) are giving room to, in one hand, social inequality and in the other hand to a Bush-like warfare. You can find in Europe a better economy and a liberal way to organize democracy than in the US.
“… isn’t it just another unnecessary layer of state power?”
Well, when your only tool is a hammer …
Politicians and bureaucrats love to build more political and bureaucratic structures. “It’s all about jobs for the boys”, as Pierre Trudeau observed of the tussle between Canadian federal and Quebec provincial politicians and bureaucrats over who would get to abuse their citizens’ rights.
True, Chirac needed a lesson, yet everyone knows he doesn’t care, and the next guy up there (Sarkozy?) will barely be less of a power thirsty politician.
One major mistake in this analysis is a small confusion thus, which the French leftwing press encourages: If at all, the referendum was felt by the voters as a last chance to oppose the good old government class. Not really Chirac.
French people are certainly not more stupid (say different) than others (despite the better cheese), yet their political delusion is without common measure to America’s, where citizens ALWAYS believe you can change things up there (and now you may ask who’s being more naïve?). 25% State workers is quite a burden.
Remember not so long ago, during last presidential election’s first round (multi-parties) ? “Far right” Le Pen came out first in France! What a blow! It was just the same message as for this election in fact … and than, on the second round (bi-parties), Chirac beat Le Pen with nearly 95% !?
Does this mean everyone loved Chirac back then and a major mistake makes everyone hate him now? Chirac is the same now as he was then.
Le Pen has quite some liberal ideas on his political program though and hence, he has too many powerful enemies. They got him labelled as an “anti-democratic”, fascist Jew hater, and woman loather long ago. You may ask yourself if that’s all really true. Few extreme people hope he would be that perhaps. Yet he’s more an extremist in the way he feels politics needs a greater change. I could never find so much statism in his view of society though. As for his opposition to the new Constitution, it’s the only way for him to get a tribune. (My favourite in his program: limited access to parliament for State workers! Oh but hey, please don’t mention I told you!)
Besides that unfortunately, this article seems to sum it up pretty well. (I wish I could read some expert doing a similar analysis on Italian society, because in France and Germany, all I hear is people praising the Italian way: officially a “poor” economy, yet a VERY rich and efficient black market. Supposedly the wealthiest society off records in Europe, and that’s not only culturally speaking!)
LePen may be somewhat against the public domain, but he regularly praises, excuse, and compliment the Third Reich in facist newspapers.
Sarkozy on the other hand, I don’t know what to think about this fellow, it seems like he’s doing a lot of liberal speaches, but how much is he really willing to get done? How much can he do at the head of the UMP? (UMP is a socialist party, despite people calling it right wing, all of their politics are lefty..)
Bastiat, we are here!
The only people dumb enough to vote yes on huge and difficult documents so that they become law are congressmen or MPs. For all the problems of mob law (i.e. direct democracy), the people on average aren’t that dumb.
The French might have gotten it right for the wrong reason, but it can work both ways – I doubt the Eurocracy would be better at dismantling the welfare state when it becomes necessary – they might do something even worse.
Realize that the slow economic cancer of socialism requires serious treatment – radical surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiation. Too many libertarians are like the Doctor that just says without any sympathy “You’ll probably die anyway, but I’ve got you scheduled for surgery next Thursday”.
If there is a large lacuna in On Human Action, Mises tends to omit emotion and its attendent unreason (Prechter and the Elliott Wave / Socionomic are starting the research, at least with fear and greed in financial markets). Even the most rational courses of actions that will hurt are done slowly, if at all.
The greatest part of civic virtue is to get people to realize their reason is right and the pain will be greater later.
And doing things locally are generally better than at a more general level, so the French as a country should be able to find a better solution to their problems than as a part of the EU.
…”LePen … regularly praises, excuse, and compliment the Third Reich in facist newspapers”…
Melt-core, can you state some direct sources for this? I ‘d be interested to see it with my own eyes.
“May France wake up before it is too late, and before we have to watch the bloody consequences splattered all over the news; and may America take heed and avoid the same destiny.”
Not a chance. The world is normalizing around the “soft” totalitarianism of which Tocqueville wrote, fueled by the fraud of central banking, and it will not be stopped. Rather, it will play itself out to the bloody end, the only question being how much blood will be spilled before the technology-driven forces of devolution gain sufficient strength to usher in an era of authentic globalization — i.e., a “new normal” of free trade, sound money, and limited government.
Utopian? Perhaps. But watch the technology:
http://www.kurzweilai.net/news/frame.html
Artisan;
Obviously I have nothing better to do then keep record of every little political scandal surrounding third-class politicians, try Paris-Match, I hear they’re great at these.
LePen followers, you’ve been lied to; you can’t organize freedom through more regulations, you can’t make France more free by closing the border. LePen is *not* a liberal; just because he wants to cut back on a few public services doesn’t make it a liberal or a libertarian. Nationalism generally isn’t such a good friend of freedom…
melt_core
Don’t worry melt_core, I would not be entitled to vote in France anyways.
But Still I have a strong opinion about French politicians. And I don’t see the point in developing the confusion or spreading the panic around Le Pen through your more than vague assertions.
Either you have a source or you don’t. What Paris-Match says about ANY politician may barely be relevant, even if pretending to do an Interview with him.
If you want to fight someone, do it on the grounds of his own ideas. Even if you consider Le Pen to be a crook because you know better (do you call Mitterand a third class politician too?), give him a fair trial.
Why would reduction of government power so clearly expressed in a political program (on his website for those who care) be less worth in Le Pen’s mouth than anywhere else?
Before you answer, consider the fact that NO other enlisted party in France ever does make such specific promises about a way to reduce State power… as for “closing the borders”, I don’t see why this simplistic description of would-be Le Pen policies makes him different than all those anti-globalization champions of the French political class.
Note: I must admit as an excuse, the name of the party, “National Front” definitely is ill-fated and does not sound economically appealing.
I am not entitled to vote in France either.
Recently; “The German occupation wasn’t particularly inhuman”
Talking about Algeria; “I have nothing to hide, I tortured people because it had to be done”
“The gas chambers are a mere detail in history”
“The assertion which your body belongs to you is completely ridiculous. It belongs to life and also, partly, the nation”
“We do not accept to see our liberties and our rights limited because we are not jewish”
“I do not support a theory on the superiority of races, but there is a different between races[...] the islamic tchador protects us from ugly womans”
condamned in 65 for “apology of warcrimes”, he had published an album featuring such party hits as like the “Nazi party hymn” or “heil hitler”.
Go ahead, you can easily find all that info online…
I am asking you; is that guy a liberal?
We do not accept to see our liberties and our rights limited because we are not jewish
this is why left wings is having less problems to accept lepen right now, because the left believe the central banks are privately owns so everything that is done in the state made by private banks with lack of ethics, big corporation who are anti-union in a generalistic comprehension. So then the rothschild comes to mind, those kind of people who profited from war.
The builderburg are as much as the kkk, so if le pen said the jew can’t be blame, you should see when we blame israel for its violence, they deny and continue. So lepen is now in the hands of the left, they will build him a place so he can help them fight the world federalist council.
But then some in the left might believe strongly
he is a tool for the bush-kissinger-rockefeller, so the left is divised into faction who can’t recognize a common ennemy…but are they condemned to have a lack of judgement? They might if the libertarian continue to infantilize them because they were victimised by union too much, the libertarian might resolve this in fighting lepen in a respectfull way. This is what you are doing in putting this words of him:
limited access to parliament for State workers, but to make the socialist speak about this would be to make sure the libertarian are not making excess either so the moderate socialist will listen to libertarian for some things.
“I do not support a theory on the superiority of races, but there is a difference between races…”
Well, that statement, at least, is true enough. Of course, “The assertion which your body belongs to you is completely ridiculous. It belongs to life and also, partly, the nation,” is a troubling statement, but no more than the typical political beliefs of Americans. The rest of his statements I’m not informed enough to judge.
…”(In France) The German occupation wasn’t particularly inhuman”
“The gas chambers are a mere detail in history”…
Both sentences I heard on radio along with the context in which they were said at the times. The scandal around it was a total French bullshit. You see, if you take the Austrian focus on economics through the times for instance, THEN Gas Chambers ARE a question of detail!
That was all a stupid journalist trap. This is partly why I started looking for words were Le Pen actually puts his signature underneath…
Le Pen is a former soldier, and definitely lacks manners. He paid for it too: he got deprived of his rights to be elected several years in the 90ies for slapping a socialist politician. That scandal certainly made him suspicious to most French… the poor lady spat in his face before she had been slapped though.
Melt-core, most of your quotes, apart from the fact that you seem to fetch them out of your memory are taken out of interviews. Nothing out of a political program…
Shall we take sentences out of Bush interviews and make him sound like Hitler? It’s easy, yet not completely fair. Mitterrand was too “smart” that you could do that with his interviews and yet he DID have an active role in the Vichy government… that proves nothing. Never mind, it could always be that a politician turns out to be the devil once he’s elected, against what he announced, so I won’t take any responsibility for what Le Pen will do if elected.
I’m just saying all those emotional reactions around that guy are too much chantilly on the tart.
“I’m just saying all those emotional reactions around that guy are too much chantilly on the tart.”
I agree with you, he’s already getting way more press then he deserves, but don’t tell me that guy is for liberty or freedom of anything.
I took the quotes here;
http://www.decadi.com/lepen.html
Melt_core. You may be right (except for the assertion that only some people “deserve” press coverage). What bothers me though: I wonder if politics is compatible with economics anyways. Most of the readings on “Mises” tell us the political changes that would be required in our society, are not in sight. So there’s a pessimistic conclusion here: there seem to be no possible line of action to promote liberalism except for humbly “spreading the word of anarchy” … and pray God!
That’s the great thing about being libertarian, Artisan. It requires no demands from others, enforces no tyranny on your neighbour. It’s how you live, and you hope that by spreading the word, praying, and being an example, it will spread.
Nothing could make me happier than liberty triumphing in a Western nation in my lifetime. Stranger things have happened, and the actions of a few can have a profound effect on the many. But I will be content with living as free as possible and promoting freedom wherever possible, regardless of the futility.
sarkozy is dishonest
Comments on this entry are closed.