Storing power in France? This is a political issue of primary importance order. Political instability had killed the Fourth Republic, it seems, or seemed that the fifth was beginning to take this path in turn: for thirty years, he is a law which means that the majority loses the election. But perhaps the remedy he found ...
First, exposing the manifestations of this law, head
1981, Mitterrand put an end to the hegemony of the right
1986, at the end of the parliamentary defeat of the left ...
1988, failure of the right to power, Mitterrand was reelected, dissolution, the new majority gives way ...
1993, the Berezina majority Balladur came to power
1995, the right continues, but it remains remarkably at the expense of existing staff - Sarkozy will remember the lesson suffered
1997, parliamentary elections? change of majority
2002, Rebelote
2007 as in 1995 the right manages to keep sending to block the existing staff.
short, the French are moaners and the result is pusillanimous: systematic change of majority subject to the assumption that wants a glorious part of the majority drew the wrath popular on the part of his ruling camp and succeeded well to replace it.
Consequences criticism: any disincentive to long-term policy, race demagoguery, moan Standing against the policies, vain belief that other policies could do better, ultimately transferring power to the political administration.
What?
Playing against his camp works see the election of Chirac and Sarkozy. Note that it is not so much a deliberate strategy that irreducible contingencies of personal rivalries. To defeat Sarkozy, left, would have done well ... reconcile with his predecessor ... to discredit the "rupture" and attributed to the Minister of the Interior's share in liabilities power.
Another hypothesis is to focus on the center ie attack the opponent in the second round ahead and ignore the extremes. Assumed dead since it failed with Jospin.
But then what? Reply: losing the election, rattles and other regional. Why? Because in giving plots of power to the opposition, local elections he withdrew the monopoly of the word utopian. In other words, once the opposition has a button on power, it can no longer argue that everything would be so much more beautiful once you have chosen.
This plan is vaguely Machiavellian he desired or is it an explanation of subsequent events that no one controls? In my opinion this is by design.
Two elements attest. First opening, which involved the movement of entrusting responsibility to the opposition, and thus deprive him of the hollow authority to promise anything and therefore raise the level of democratic debate. Secondly the systematicity of the successful opposition to small elections in recent years, the last case dated happens tonight. The
such legislation be thwarted? 2012 years-test. If the strategy works Sarkozy, promises the reign of the center-right for a while. In the absence of repolarization predictable French political landscape.
First, exposing the manifestations of this law, head
1981, Mitterrand put an end to the hegemony of the right
1986, at the end of the parliamentary defeat of the left ...
1988, failure of the right to power, Mitterrand was reelected, dissolution, the new majority gives way ...
1993, the Berezina majority Balladur came to power
1995, the right continues, but it remains remarkably at the expense of existing staff - Sarkozy will remember the lesson suffered
1997, parliamentary elections? change of majority
2002, Rebelote
2007 as in 1995 the right manages to keep sending to block the existing staff.
short, the French are moaners and the result is pusillanimous: systematic change of majority subject to the assumption that wants a glorious part of the majority drew the wrath popular on the part of his ruling camp and succeeded well to replace it.
Consequences criticism: any disincentive to long-term policy, race demagoguery, moan Standing against the policies, vain belief that other policies could do better, ultimately transferring power to the political administration.
What?
Playing against his camp works see the election of Chirac and Sarkozy. Note that it is not so much a deliberate strategy that irreducible contingencies of personal rivalries. To defeat Sarkozy, left, would have done well ... reconcile with his predecessor ... to discredit the "rupture" and attributed to the Minister of the Interior's share in liabilities power.
Another hypothesis is to focus on the center ie attack the opponent in the second round ahead and ignore the extremes. Assumed dead since it failed with Jospin.
But then what? Reply: losing the election, rattles and other regional. Why? Because in giving plots of power to the opposition, local elections he withdrew the monopoly of the word utopian. In other words, once the opposition has a button on power, it can no longer argue that everything would be so much more beautiful once you have chosen.
This plan is vaguely Machiavellian he desired or is it an explanation of subsequent events that no one controls? In my opinion this is by design.
Two elements attest. First opening, which involved the movement of entrusting responsibility to the opposition, and thus deprive him of the hollow authority to promise anything and therefore raise the level of democratic debate. Secondly the systematicity of the successful opposition to small elections in recent years, the last case dated happens tonight. The
such legislation be thwarted? 2012 years-test. If the strategy works Sarkozy, promises the reign of the center-right for a while. In the absence of repolarization predictable French political landscape.
0 comments:
Post a Comment