Well, if he gave both ends of the political spectrum what they wanted and needed (within reason), he'd still be in the center and likely be less hated.
Please give her more airtime, I love her professional, composed and well made reports - and bonus point, she's the only colleague who can pronounce foreign words properly! Bien joué ;)
All of what you said, plus I am glad to see the diversity. I have no idea how most international news is presented, as I live in a very rural area of the US with mostly people in my Native tribe, but here women are co-anchors. I'm a middle aged minority and I grew up seeing nothing but white men. I still see mostly white men. Warms my heart to see the younger generation do things right when they run things. *edit* I honestly don't think she's a diversity hire, realized my statement could be taken that way or seen as an insult. I honestly think TLDR didn't even consider this. That's why my heart is warmed. Where I live the Christian Bible is being forced taught in public schools, while teachers (like I was) are fleeing en mass because they can suffer legal consequences for stating that slavery was a racial issue/don't want to teach the Bible. Our news casters don't even mention it.
He's a politician in the West, as France isn't the only Western country with generalized discontent right now. If this was the only factor, however, Macron would still remain in charge despite discontent ; just like Sanchez in Spain.
You do realize there are popular candidates and politicians, right? Just cause they aren't as famous as the ones who are shit dosent make them not exist.
The sad thing is this isn't even really a joke. If you look at the polling for French Presidents over the past 30-40 years, they all become extremely unpopular around the 4-5 year mark. The countries electorate is fickle and slow/resistant to change with the hyper-partisan left and right wing blocs are very combative to basically anyone that's not as ideologically pure as they are. I'll be surprised if the next two or three President's after Macron can somehow break the cycle.
Its management went down the drain because initially it was some kind of fucking theater. Attempts to push his wife into management positions, to make her the first lady, statements that he is not able to manage without her and they will make decisions together. This theater, when after Russia’s attack on Ukraine he changed into sweatshirts and pretended to be concerned, copying Zelensky. And his tone when he advised the protesting farmers to do something useful. It's theater after theater. And then three billions of government money disappeared, oh. Crime and unemployment are through the roof and there is nothing he can do. But the name champagne may now only apply to sparkling wines from the Champagne region.The same thing with cognac. Well, they returned the historical blue tint on the French flag, they did a very important thing🤦♀️. He set up his own playground from France and now threw out the tantrum because they didn’t like him.
I'm French, living in France, and I approve everything said in this video. Very clear, very informative, non-partisan, well-informed : Two thumbs up 👍👍, and Merci.
There is an important omission about the immigration law. It was censored by the Constitutional Council and its harsher articles were removed. Morever, this law was harsher because LR refused to vote the initial law and Macron didn't wanted to use yet another 49.3. He also knew that most of what was added by the LR dominated senate would be stripped off by the constituional council, and that's exactly what happened. Macron never really intended to make a harsh immigration law, and taking action on this issue isn't going after the RN votes which he would never get anyway, it's just listening to an opinion that is majority among French people.
@@guillaumeroussel8633 You know, it's made for people who are not awarded of all the subtilities of French politics. So, they apply the KISS principle : "Keep it simple stupid !" 😁
@@ctrlzed5132 Darn, you saw right through my exaggeration for dramatic purposes! ;-) I'm not French, so my opinion: a) matters much less (ie, I can't very much influence today's elections' outcomes) and b) is to be taken very a big grain of salt (I'm an avid reader of "Le canard enchaîné", which is rarely kind to the president; so my opinion is biased). Still, the man sees France like a plucky "start-up" nation and fancies himself a savvy CEO but behaves more like a dictator. He has quite a few issues to work on on a personal level. Anyway, that's what the French are stuck with for the foreseeable future and I wish them well; yet, I'd be lying if were to say seeing him lose his big gamble wouldn't put a ginormous grin on my face :-D
Kinda find it funny the fact that everyone in the comments dislikes macron so much both right and left keep trying to push him to the other side of the spectrum lmao
I can image a form of centrism which pragmatically combines the most popular and successful ideas from the left and right. Currently, most mainstream centrist parties seem to combine the worst of both, to the benefit of the small elite who fund them. Like privatizing gains and socializing losses.
@Minimmalmythicist That’s quite an interesting theory. I’ve long thought of liberal social democracy as being the reasonable synthesis between capitalism and socialism. But I’d never really considered that the threat of communist revolution might be necessary to make that happen.
@Minimmalmythicist I do think there’s a reasonable case to be made that the net migration rate should never be higher than the number of homes we’re building though. It’s just deeply unfair to drive up people’s rents and force them to move into smaller homes. We could choose to build more homes or fewer. But either way the homes should have to be built _before_ we issue hundreds of thousands more visas.
Centrism can be effective when you build a social concensus, are effective and have your own principles. It's not about being a vacuum of values, it's about being a moderate in the means or at least dialogue while having very clear how you want your country to look. Macron didn't have commitment to a national vision for France, he was the response to the national visions of those perceived as more radical than himself. Hence, he couldn't ever have had that much momentum, especially if his competent centrism didn't actually deliver on the competence part.
Sadly, these days "centrists" are more often than not useful idiots for the right who can't identify when one side of the isle has completely lost the plot, rather than actually meaningfully moderate.
"centrism" on that case being just neoliberalism with traditional conservative and liberal policies, there ain't a single "centrist" policy made on that goverment, whatever would that mean
Centrism by its very definition isn’t competent. They never get anything done, uphold the establishment and drive the working class into fascists arms. Neo-liberal policies always lack any real benefit for the average people, and this allowed the right wing to peel off voters with social issues.
What are you talking about? Their centrists because everyone to the right of him thinks he's left and everyone left of him thinks he's right wing... that's what centrism is. If you don't think he's center you're a super extremist.
@@Kalimdor199Menegroth The fact that the leftists are saying he was always rightist, seems to contradict that. If anything that shows that Macron himself is fairly centrist going by the left and right wing's reactions to him.
Ok, as a French, I have to speak politics of my country, 1- When Macron went to power, he promised to raise the age of retirement from 60 to 65, in 2023 the age of retirement would be 61, 62 for 2024, all this whilst not affecting people who would retire in said yeas and etc... but he quickly said 'F*ck all' and raised it to 65 as well as halted the possibility to retire to those who wanted to retire. 2- The shooting of the Algerian teen was after he drove over the speed limit, refused to stop after police biker's attempted to stop him, the teen almost killed several people on the way, and the only way to stop the chase was to shoot him when he got stuck in traffic, the cops tried to make him give up, when he saw a chance, he tried getting away, AGAIN, which was when he got shoot, the cops even warned him that if he drove away they'd shoot him, guess what he did? he drove away, the cops merely followed up with their promise and light him up. There is footage of the shooting online, look it up in French and you'll see what I mean.
Hmmm... QU'EST-CE QUE TU RACONTES ? Déjà l'âge de retraite était à 62 avant Macron hein c'est Sarkozy qui est passé de 60 à 62. ET PUIS MACRON L'A AUGMENTE A 64 PAS A 65 ? Donc déjà ton premier point j'ai jamais vu autant de fausses infos stupides dans une même phrase, ça montre juste un manque évident de culture politique. Chuis pas macroniste je cherche pas à le défendre là mais je peux juste pas te laisser raconter n'importe quoi, il a augmenté la retraite de 2 ans pas de 5 ans, et puis j'ai pas compris le délire de "61, 62 en 2024" ça pouvait pas être 61 vu que depuis Sarkozy c'est déjà à 62, la seule promesse que Macron a fait qu'il a pas tenu c'est de NE PAS TOUCHER aux retraites. Pour ton deuxième point, NON, il n'a pas roulé à plus que la limite de vitesse, il était reproché de rouler SANS PERMIS. Mais il n'a jamais mis en danger quique ce soit dans sa course, évidemment si c'était un taré qui fonçait sur les trottoirs, dans des gens, etc. y aurait pas eu de soutien, sauf que non. C'était un ado en train de faire une bêtise, mais qui restait humain, il n'avait pas envie de mettre en danger quique ce soit, il SAVAIT conduire, il avait pas de permis mais il a du l'apprendre d'autre part car 5 minutes de course poursuite sans faire de mal à quique ce soit c'est pas n'importe qui qui peut y arriver. Et puis non sur la vidéo les policiers ne le "menacent" pas, on en entend clairement un dire "Shoot le" à celui qui a le pistolet, avant même que Nahel démarre, Nahel a littéralement fui pour sa vie car les policiers le menaçaient pas de lui tirer dessus s'il roulait, mais ils disaient clairement qu'ils comptaient lui tirer dessus direct même s'il restait immobile.
@@Kephy_ Alors je suis seulment une victimes de fake news alors, principalement dans le côté de l'âge de retraite. Tous se que j'ai dit c'est les choses que j'ai étendue dans les journal, est même si j'ai dis des faux info, Macron aurais jamais dû changer l'âge de retraite. Après si t'as des bonnes sources, envoi-le moi ici, merci. Après, quant à l'Algérie, une voiture c'est sa peut-être une armé mortelle, ils c'est fait tirés seulment apres qu'il à mis le pied sur l'accélérateur, là même raison que les flics Américain veulent finirs les course de poursuite le plus vîtes, pour éviter que des gents meur, tu peux aussi bien défendre l'Algérien avec la psychologie humaine, qu'ils avait peur, mes quand tas deux mecs avec des armée pointé vers toi, tu suis leurs ordres, si c'est des flic, tu gagne pas la lutte dans la rue, tu là gagne devant un juge. Même s'il ont pas menacé directement, avoir des armés pointé vers toi sa devrait être un signal que tu devrais coopère avec les flic, même si ils finit en prison, ils serais vivant. Peut importe que ils savais conduire où pas, t'as pas de permis, ne conduit pas, fin d'histoire. Encore une fois, si t'as des bonnes sources, envoi-le moi ici.
@@Kephy_ j'avais envoyé 3 paragraphes, bah RUclips m'a dit "fuck you" et ça pas envoyé, donc je fais un résumé. Mes infos sont dû journal pour l'âge de retraite, apres, si t'as des meilleurs sources, merci de les envoyer. Après, quant à l'Algerien: 1. Il avait rien à faire d'arrière un volant sans supervision d'un adulte responsable avec permission. 2. Tu peux "savoir" conduire, met si tu fais un accident, là faute c'est directement à tois. 3. Quand t'as des armés pointé a tois, spécialement des flics, tu commence pas à accélérer, dans la vidéo, oui ils ont ouvert feu apres que ils dîtes pour tires, aussi, les flic sont aussi humain, oui, il y à des mauvaise pomme partout, inclus d'ans la Police, dans la position d'un flic, t'as un mec d'arrière le volant qu'il refusé d'arrêté la voiture, il veut pas coopérer avec toi, qu'il commence directement à accélère le moment qu'ils peut, si tu l'arrêté pas il finiras par tuer quelqu'un, les Américains sont un bon example de sa, tous se qu'ils faut c'est qu'ils rentré en panique est qu'il faîtes un mauvais tour est ils peut se tuer, tuer les passagers est peut-être une famille dans une autre voiture, une voiture, n'importe qui là conduit, cest une armé mortelle tel comme une arme de feu. Est-ce que la police pourrait avoir fait mieux, peut-être, à la fin de la journée, c'est fait, c'est fait, je pense même que les flic se sont fais punir, j'avais pas trop vue sûr le pos-incident.
It’s like the Notwithstanding clause in Canada that just allows the federal or provincial government to ignore certain sections in the constitution like fundamental freedoms( freedom of religion, peaceful assembly, thought,etc), legal rights(not to be arbitrarily detained,etc) and equality rights( no discrimination). Thankfully it doesn’t apply to democratic rights but still
The "idea" of the 49.3 is to let the prime minister pass important votes if the Parliament is stalling too much or too fractured. It's a pretty controversial tool, but it comes with several caveats. The main one is that a 49.3 automatically triggers a vote of no confidence against the prime minister. If the government wins, the law passes. If they lose, the law is scrapped and the prime minister is fired, together with *the whole government*. The president has to choose a new prime minister, who must be approved by the parliament, and who will build a new government. Also, it's the *prime minister*, not the president that calls for a 49.3. During Macron's government, this difference was moot because he had enough votes to choose a prime minister aligned with him. During a co-habitation, when the parliament and the president are not aligned (and which will probably be the scenario for the next two years), the president cannot force a law with this tool.
@@TheRodcoIt isn't proportional in the official sense but unlike most FPTP-systems it applies a two-round system which in turn makes the result more proportional than say the british parliamentary election. And of course it is legal and constitutional, it is in the constitution. But that doesn't make something right in and of itself. It could be argued to be democratic, also necessary as a last resort. But it is inherently an article which allows the president to bypass a democratically elected assembly, it is necessary for executive efficiency but at the expense of "the peoples will" and the representation of it in the government in the form of the parliament. Both efficiency and representation matter in a democracy although it being used so frequently certainly isn't to be preferred.
So ... I wrote a longer comment, but youtube decided to send it to the void ... Long story short, the 49.3 is controversial, but it has a big caveat: the law doesn't pass automatically, the 49.3 forces a vote of no confidence against the prime minister. If they lose it, the law is scrapped, as well as the whole government. The president then has to build a new one. Also, it's the prime minister that calls for a 49.3, not the president. If both are aligned (which was the case during most of Macron's government), this point is moot. But, if they're not, a president cannot use it to force a law.
Once you factor in inflation the GDP per person has been going down in French since, at least, 2000. This is pretty much similar in all developed countries, with only a few exceptions, such as Japan and perhaps South Korea. When people see their living standards going down, then people get grumpy and it really does not matter what side of politics you are from. I am certain there are a long list of other minor reasons as all governments, the longer you are in power, the more people you end up annoying.
64 retirement age is still below what other European countrie have. What do the French expect? Life expectancy has risen, university studies take more and more time. The average years in retirement should be less than the years doing full time jobs.
Do what you want in your countries, if you want to die working it's your problem . Our system is sustainable despite what macron said, so this reform has to and will be suppress
TBH the British election is a much more local affair with little consequence outside the UK. But the French election will have some impact on 450 million EUropeans, Ukraine, and the Eurozone, among others. In that sense, it's significantly more important than the British election.
He's not taxing the rich? In France if you make 100k a year net, you have already paid 145k to the state (110k in social contributions, 35k in income taxes). Your employer has to pay 245k for you to get 100k to spend. And that's before paying your other taxes! And that's with Macron having had full control of the parliament. Keep it real, in France the rich are paying their fair share (and they're usually okay with it otherwise they would have left)
@@huguesjouffrai9618 100K a year you're talking about middle class. Of course those and lower class are the one's who pay the taxes of the likes of Bernard Arnault. Those are the real rich that instead of paying taxes are actually milking it as much as they can.
People talking about centrism in the comments 😂 Centrism DOES exist! There is not only black and white! Some people have more right views on certain topics and more left on others
The pension system bankrupting the state was the status quo. He tried doing something about that and there was a revolt. I have to retire at 67 in the Netherlands. The French revolt for retiring at 62. Sure, you do you. But thanks to the Euro I'm now also liable for french debt. Interest rates will be kept low to save France and a side effect is me getting absolutely fucked trying to enter the housing market.
The pension system was doing fine, so said many studies. Even going into excedents. Macron just wanted to make the country and the rich richer and the poor poorer and dead right after retirement.
Never saw him representing the status quo. He's one of the most vocal voices on the European stage for change, wanting to reform the EU. And he tackled long overdue issues like the pension reform that are naturally unpopular but for the greater benefit of the country.
@@Jajalaatmaar Small correction as a Frenchman: the legal age to start retiring is 64 but to get a full pension it's 67. Front Populaire proposes 60/64 and RN 62/66
Well still better than the left, but surely they'll think the same with the right. If there was a centrist or even kind of leftist party against immigration it would win everywhere.
According to the neoliberal The Economist: "Much of the credit belongs to Emmanuel Macron. His seven years as president have seen a sustained effort to remake France as a modern, business-friendly economy. He has reformed employment to encourage bosses to take on workers. Since he moved into the Elysée in 2017, 2m jobs have been created and over 6m businesses set up. He has cut business taxes, along with stifling wealth taxes. He has boosted education and started to reform the unaffordable pension system. France’s growth is above the euro-zone average, and poverty rates below it."
The problem isn't raising the pension age but setting a higher one for all job sectors. Bureaucrats and office workers can work longer but hard physical labour cannot.
White collar jobs are strongly associated with chronic stress and burnout which also lead to poor quality of life. Blue collar is indeed physically demanding (improved a lot with modern technology, if employers follow the safety standards ofc), but it doesn't usually require any decision making, time management or much interaction with corny customers, partners or even public institutions. Mentally consuming stuff which can also affect individuals physically in the longterm run (headaches, insomnia, disorders etc). Also, blue collar is strictly restricted at the workplace, unlike white collar employees who usually have to do a lot of preparation, research, work on projects close to their deadline etc at home.
The problem was doing it for no real reason, he made economist made a study on the future of how well the today's (perfectly fonctioning) service would work in many years, but forced them not to consider the real situation of France under his mandate. The economists published a model where after his mandate the situation "crashed" to return to reality, and this "crash" would have potentially stop pensions from functioning after a few years in the worst cases... It was obviously a right economical policy with objective to increase labor supply and diminish salaries, that no one in the electorate actually want...
@@L425-g1f Raising the pension age not only HAS real reasons, it is practically unavoidable and not only in France but everywhere. Life expectancy is rising continually and the demographic structure makes paying for pensions even more difficult. You need immigration to pay for that but this increases house prices and rents - along with all the problems scared right-wingers will create including voting for openly authoritarian parties.
Other EU countries have had significantly higher pension ages for decades. If safety procedures are met, physically demanding jobs do not decrease lifespan or ability to work. Labour safety standards are the solution to this issue.
The problem with modern politics is that everyone is fixated on the left vs the right while ignoring the other part of the political spectrum, authoritarianism vs liberalism. Yes Macron is a centrist. But he's also *extremely* authoritarian. Which is what people actually hate about him, not his centrist policies.
Actually, no, in France, people do hate the centre, the dominant policy trends that have been in place for the last thirty years. You're welcome to look up polling data on what people think of immigration, the pensions reform, etc.
How the fck is he authoritarian? He just threw his lead in parliament to democracy willingly. Every thing he did as far as I know was not anti-democratic
I'm not French so maybe there's something I don't know, but generally from what I've seen Macron's decline is due to actions under his administration, not the decline of centrism as an ideology, I predict Macron's party will have a period of losses but if a new popular face that sticks to centrism is introduced they might come back in the distant future.
Macron's centrism is unpopular in France for many reasons, one of them being that it's actually right-wing policies masked under a centrist veil. But he does most of what Le Pen would do, without being a fascist 70% of the time.
@@JHBG1971 That's pretty much true other than like the last 30-50 years in western countries. Not being able to afford a house and family and becoming an ethnic minority in you own city in a few decades really has people scared.
He's not really a centrist, he's a neoliberal. If you want an American comparison, it's George W. Bush. Now, I actually don't mind neoliberalism, I grew up with the ideology. But it has some real blind spots when it comes to culture and immigration.
What? Clinton is a neoliberal, George W is a neocon. Macron would definitely be left of center than George W on cultural issues. George W is Methodist, while Macron is not religious or identifies as such…unless he is Christian, as I could be wrong if there’s something I don’t know.
I think what would be very interesting would be to show analysis like this for other countries in EU. For example I’d love to know what’s going on in Greece, Portugal, Estonia, Cyprus… France and Germany might be the most populous countries but this channel is called EU so it would be good ❤
Just to say the 2:15 map is incorrect Far right is way stronger in the north and east while left is stronger in south west and Britanny but I guess it was just to give an example
No such thing as far center. In fact, given that what is currently labeled as 'far right' was just center-right 15 years ago then I doubt there is such thing as 'center' either unless it is just a mix of left and right politices.
@@Hardcore_Remixer I disagree. Someone came up with the phrase ‘extreme centre of British politics’ and France is just like Britain. I think that ‘far centre’ is just recasting ‘extreme centre’ and extreme centre rings true. The political centre has given us: biggest war crime of the century (Iraq 2003); biggest war crime of 2010s (Libya 2011); and absolute support for biggest war crime of 2020s (genocide in Gaza). War crimes and genocide exemplify extremism. The centre is extremist.
@@minsapint8007 Because 'the center' is just a combination of left and right. I guess that by extreme center you mean extreme left and extreme right wing policies. Being economically right wing and socially left wing doesn't make you center on their economical or social terms. I haven't got to see Netanyahu's policies, but given that he wants to get rid of the Palestinians from Gaza then I can tell he is socially (and geopolitically) right wing and not center by all means. You can also have a look at China. Communist political system with capitalist economy. Does this make them center? Even the 2D one is an extreme summarization of the reality and misses some details, but the 1D political spectrum is simply misleading. However, Macron's only right wing policy I have seen is the raising of the retirement age.
@@Hardcore_Remixer I’m not sure that expanding the leeway for police conduct could be described as a left or center policy. But then again, there’s nothing that necessarily conflicts with a police state anywhere on the simple left right spectrum.
Although the whole immigration law episode was indeed an ideological win for the national rally, the harder law didn't come from his party but from the more right leaning republicans that still have a majority in the senate (despite representing around 5% of the votes in latest national elections) and amended the original version of the government. Nonetheless, all hard measures included within this version were declared unconstitutional by the constitutional court after Macron asked them to examínate It, and we ended up with an immigration law that is very similar to the one his government first proposed. It was a short term victory for his party, but I think this whole process ended up nourishing the anti establishment feeling against his party and institutions like the constitutional court that was seen by many as more of a political than a judicial institution, acting ideologically (many of its member being former left wing politicians with no background in Law). With that plus the fact that according to polls, the french public was overwhelmingly backing the harder version of the law, I don't think we can say it was a good move for Macron's popularity.
We don't know what he was thinking. In my opinion he envisioned several possibilities and figured they were all better than the situation he was in. He would have probably had to call elections after summer anyways because there was no way to pass next years' budget.
Instead of pushing through leguslation without parliamentary approval, he should have tried to forge issue related alliances and find compromises. Maybe then public unrest wouldn't have been as bad as it was and partially still is.
To be fair to Macron, *all* French presidents are unpopular - this is country whose founding myth is the French revolution, whose national identity is built on suspicion of those in power. Macron actually did okay to win a second term, something neither Sarkozy nor Hollande before him managed. And before that, Mitterand and Chirac had to experience periods of cohabitation, just like Macron is going to have to do now. So from a historical perspective he's only averagely unpopular for a French president, maybe even a little bit better than average.
I still find it insane that there were mass riots over the retirement age being raised to 64. France has a life expectancy of 82. The old system had people collecting pensions for nearly 1/3 of their adult life.
Well people don't want higher retirement age and immigration cause it devalues work. Less people = higher wages. Business and Goverment obviously doesn't want that as they will pay for it. It's classic case of dychotomy between county&society wants. If one want to be devil advocate he can argue that there is also economy that might not work the way society wants. Economy can just collapse. But yet it doesn't matter for growing part of society - if economy collapses in 10-20 years but person itself has only estimated 5 years left of life what does it matter to him/her? So people want to maximize their life enjoyment and after them the world can end for all they care ;)
Quite the half-assed job this time, completely overlooking one of the simplest reasons why Macron was hated in the first place: The man itself. He's selfish, arrogant, shows no restraint when he insults a large part of french population and lavishly rains money on the already rich people and business. All of this while surrounding himself with traitors from both the left and right wing, business people with no experience and no morality, and finally, his past job and behavior during Hollande's era. It didn't take long for people, especially the rural world to hate him: he doesn't care about France nor the french. Only about himself, his friends and business. This channel totally failed to notice it.
@@wendigotea6020 Perhaps. I mean, i live in France, follow France's political circus since decades, and have to deal with whatever crap comes out of it like everyone else. So yeah. Who am i to know what french people think about him?
@@padriandusk7107 You’ve clearly taken the shortcut to criticism by relying on tired personal attacks and oversimplifications rather than diving into the real complexities of Macron’s presidency. Calling him "selfish" and "arrogant" is a lazy way of dismissing the nuanced and often contentious decisions he had to make as president. You act like his policies are all about lavishly favoring the rich, but fail to acknowledge that his economic reforms were driven by long-term growth strategies that critics and supporters alike argue about. As for the "traitors" in his coalition, maybe his attempt to unite the left and right under a centrist banner isn’t as naive as you think it’s called trying to heal a divided country. Blaming him for rural discontent without addressing the bigger structural issues at play, like the environmental policies and systemic inequality, is typical of shallow analysis. Maybe next time, instead of throwing around buzzwords and insults, try understanding the broader picture this isn’t a reality show, it’s governance.
@wendigotea6020 I can also throw around names. Alexandre Benalla, Aurore Bergé, Alexis Kohler. Those names amongst others are why french people knows that man cares little about justice and fairness. I can even throw around quotes: "I'm not here to protect existing jobs", "French workers earn too much", "France still mourns a king", "French workers must work more without earning more", "British were luck to have Thatcher(LOL)", "There's no french culture. I've never seen it", "A train station is a place where you come accross successful people and people who are nothing". Those quotes amongst others are why french people knows that man cares little about his country and its people. What you think is irrelevant. I'm stating facts which, indeed, tires me to no end, tho i never had any hope to begin with regarding what would happen: For years, french people has been fed up with what corrupted, immoral people in politics have been doing and saying. They wanted change and many amongst them feared what would happen in the far left or the far right. Macron appeared and took everything he could from both the left and the right, in which noone believed anymore anyway. The result was predictable: Macron won only because he found himself in a duel against Le Pen. And each time he won, he surrounded himself with EVERYTHING that made people angry prior to his election. That's another reason why i know you know nothing about France and french people. And be honest: you don't care anyway. You just didn't like how i criticized the channel for ignoring the most flagrant signals about why french people hates Macron. You won't change my mind, forged by first-hand experience in a country you probably never even approached with a finger on the map. I won't change your mind, forged by something i don't really want to imagine nor care, if it led to that kind of mindset. Let's leave it at that. I'll happily criticize the channel each time it fails at analyzing properly what's going on in France. Feel free to meet me there again. But i won't be looking for you. Noone should.
What do you mean "how it failed"? It doesn't matter how "centrist" or "reasonable" you are, you can't have unrestricted immigration and immigrant crime reigning supreme in every major city.
Macron is only a centrist by name. His policies, both economical and social have all been closer to the right than anything else. I struggle to recall anything he's done that could be considered left leaning to counteract this. Moreover it's his repeated use of 49.3 and general disregard for the people's will in favor of helping big business, as well as tough répression on any form of contestation that led him to become so unpopular.
@@aesma2522 neither of these issues lie on the left-right spectrum. The first is a personal freedom discussion, for the second you need to go into the details but generally spending above a nation's means is bipartisan.
@@Daniel-q9f8p In France our right wing is pretty conservative socially so yes it's left wing to vote for things like gay marriage, there was literally only one right wing MP that voted for that (and he's a gay man). Later he was a minister for Macron so he moved to the center. I agree that if you look at the US the insane deficit spending is bipartisan but in the EU it isn't the case, running a tight ship is at least in theory still a common right-wing thing.
Shocking. Centrist liberal with no interest in politics and views the electorate as an impediment to technocracy, while tacking right on social issues at every opportunity bar one fails to gain consent for governance long term. Truly shocking. There’s no way you could predict this. And leading the centre in this rightward direction has never ever before produced a rightwards shift in the electorate thereafter either, it’d sooooo unpreceddented. I just can’t imagine why a liberal who campaigns for nothing, thereby generating consent for their programme, who simply follows the polls on what to discuss lost control of the narrative, it’s just in comprehensible why a person who refuses to campaign for a position ends up talking about things on ground he is uncomfortable in, if only there was a class of people who had the power and ability to shape the national discussion.
Poor Macron. As a non-European I must say he's one of the more tolerable political types in Europe tbh. He'll have to do something big *AND* positive to keep going..
Because centrism is utterly meaningless and completely relative to what is to the left and right of it. In this case what macron meant by centrist was the status quo, and nobody wanted that.
@@catlover12045 true, and honestly that's the one policy of his I actually do support and pensions are honestly the one area the RN concerns me. But overall I think it's clear Macrons policies are just the same as the policies of all the elites and mainstream 'centrist' parties of Europe, and that's why I think he is still a status quo politician, even if he does break with it occasionally.
@@JamesL42 Many argue he's center-right... which makes sense given his economic policies. Either way, it was him who broke the center right/center left duopoly in France.
The problem with centrism is it stands for nothing and everything all at the same time Centrism is dying a death as it has no principles of it's own only what it borrows from time to time from the two poles No principles no guiding compass .. after while people see through this
I disagree completely. "The two poles", as you say, are filled with dogmatic thinkers, whereas the center is the home of pragmatic thinkers. People do not "see through this". The problem is that many people are too dumb to understand nuanced, pragmatic solutions and they love the sound of on-the-nose, dogmatic solutions, although those latter solutions do not actually work.
@@EaglePicking Centrism has no basis other than what it borrows elsewhere Perfectly legitimate to say centrism can and does take ideas and implement them in a less full way. It certainly contains a mix of both. So in essence its the compromise position. Over time all compromises tend to failure .. birth rate case in point, a mix of compromise positions has led to a global baby shortage. Ultimately it has no basis in and of itself it's a cuckoo philosophy PS like a lot of centrists you reach for personal insults and attack .. calling people dumb is basically you admitting you have no actual position to defend So you resort to insults, have a good day
@@EaglePickingcentrists are not as pragmatic as you think. They simply view themselves as such bc they defer to the status quo of the system of power they find themselves in. This isnt pragmatic this is an ideological commitment. The idea that the status quo is the best.
@@EaglePickingI love also that you demonstrate one of the massive flaws of centrists in their ability to attract support. You're smug. You think you've come to your position bc you're the smartest, most morally correct person capable of seeing things "rationally" or "realistically" and if anyone disagrees it's not bc there is merit in the criticism of your ideology or program, ones that should be taken in to account to improve your program and attract more people. No it's the people's fault for not being as smart and moral as you.
Foolish. Being centrist neutral IS an ideology itself. Taking a bit of the left and a bit of the right, and fitting them to the need of one’s country. That is exactly what we need in 2024, transformative, flexible politics, not conservative hardliners of the left or right
5:35 isn't that graph supposed to be employment rate/labor participation rate rather then UN-employment? French Youth Unemployment is ~17% or so, give or take, no?
Yes. It's the corrupt vs. representatives of the people. They are illiberal, against freedom of religion, thought, and speech. Even some conservative parties have been corrupted here in Canada. Fortunately, we cleaned up the hidden "agents" inside the National Council running the Conservative party of Canada.Then we got rid of the fake-conservative leader Erin O'Toole, replacing him with Pierre Poilievre. But provincially, the Ontario Conservatives are corrupt under Doug Ford. The evil agents are everywhere such as the Ontario Law Society administering the bar, lawyer licensing, in Ontario Canada. Look up: Statement of Principles Ontario Law. The agents are everywhere: school boards, municipal city governments, etc... We must track them and expose them. Easy to find: They try to impose so many poison pilled "human rights". For example, erasing women and girl's rights to replace them with trans rights, forcing children to body negativity, choosing the "right body" and cut off what is "wrong." leading to regret and de-transitioning but who cannot function sexually or cannot have children. Too much to explain here but the liberal parties and centrist parties have pretty much all been taken over.
Remember when Trump said that “there will be a massacre” when he lost? The whole media, even here in Europe, was up in arms about the threat. But he said it between two arguments about why Democrats would “massacre” American industry. Imagine if the media treated Macron’s words the same way.
Maybe, just maybe, you're a r3t4rd who has no idea what policies are in question and what the respective stances of the parties in question are on them?
The far right when it comes to economics is not really right leaning, they have more like left policies in their agenda but just for pure french citizens, excluding the rest. Never understood what we put them on the right except for their xenophobia
There is a massive error on the Unemployment Rate chart(at. 5:34) - the provided percentages are impossible. You are showing youth unemployment rate between 75 and 90% and overall unemployment between 55 -62%. Can you imagine what would happen if this was the case???!
The linear representation of politic (left - center - right) is limited. There are multiple centers in politic and Macron's centrism is often called far-center or extreme center.
5:33 Is that graph saying youth unemployment was at times at 90% and general around 60%? Surely that can't be right, and that's actually per thousand, or something?
Additional details: Macron is a representative of what Pierre Serna, a historian of the Revolution and the First Empire, has called "the extreme/radical center". It's not just centrism, it's a certain brand of centrism that pretends to be above all parties and is completely intolerant to any ideology outside of it, calling it extremist and dangerous for democracy/liberty/whatever term the regime describes itself as, which is in itself an ideological position, just one defending the status quo. Ever since 2017, he came in claiming he would fight populism "on both sides" (as if there's an equivalence between the far right and what he calls the far left), but has instead lead policies that have increased wealth inequalities, made the budget worse due to refusing to raise taxes on the wealthy, has shown himself to be increasingly authoritarian in repressing protests and passing legislation, and has alternated with appealing to center-left voters to present himself as a dam against the far right and normalizing it by taking up some of its talking points and policy proposals, as well as demonizing the left by calling any program even slightly social democratic (like the New Popular Front's or even La France insoumise's) "far left", which isn't the case according to most political scientist, historians and the Conseil d'État, which serves both as one of the two highest courts in France and as an advisory body for the government to write legislative bills (not exactly a den of leftists). He's basically building the far right (and the National Rally is indeed classified as such by those dag-nasty political scientists, historians and jurists) a golden bridge to power, whether he's conscious of it or not. His goal has always been to divide the left, by absorbing the center-left and demonizing and marginalizing the more "radical" side (even if again, there's nothing very radical about LFI's platform), and set up the match between him and Le Pen, content to let the RN become the biggest party in the meantime. The problem is that he's taken what used to be a common agreement among all republican (small-r) parties, not letting the far right get into power, and turned it into a cynical electoral tool. And people are now sufficiently done with him, and the far-right has taken enough root, that he's actually at risk of losing power. So after he got trounced in the European elections, he decided to say "f*** it, better have them be in government now until 2027 and let them wear themselves out so my successor can win the presidency then". Which, aside from being reviling political cynicism, is so colossally stupid because we've seen in the past few years that when right-wing populists get into power in liberal democracies, they don't hand back the reins willingly.
He couldnt because France economic situation is a disaster. They need to change their economic model completely and reduce worker rights to remain competitive. Only extreme right policies and achieve it with strong police task force to contain stuff like gilet jaune.
@@alexlehrersh9951 Economically, all of his major policies were really far right (reducing taxes on the rich, pushing the age of retirement, privatazing...), and he made them pass even though there was massive strikes through undemocratic processes. You call this leftwing ?
in france it is the constitutional council. It is made of smart people who know what they're talking about. And they said Marine party is far right, now the french are dumb enough to pick her and will find out.
Centrists exist primarily to further the interests of business. Business doesn't like being taxed to contribute to the society it relies on, nor does it like the threat of dictatorial government controlling what it does. So it likes policies that steer in-between the extremes, in the centre. Which is often less bad for ordinary people than the extremes can be. But business also likes having all of the money. So centrist governments also have a tendency to alter the system so that more and more money flows out of the hands of the public and into the hands of the business owning elites, which is bad for everyone. To start with this is fine, you get economic stability, businesses create wealth which employs people so most people feel better off, and the enrichment of the rich only happens in small steps that aren't really felt. But the longer it goes on for the more those little enrichments add on top of each other. Until you end up with a society where the public is getting noticeably poorer but most people dont understand why, and the only solutions the centrists have is the same ones they've been doing this whole time. So people start seeing through them. Then people start turning back to the extremes. The right tells people that they are poor because of immigrants or black people or the gays or because the jews or whatever. The left tells people they are poor because the rich have taken all their money, but their solutions to getting that money back aren't always well thought out. But ultimately, centrists can't remain in power forever, because the incentives they exist under are toxic to society. You can only impoverish the public for soo long before theres either a swing towards redistribution to solve the problem or towards dictatorship to keep the public from complaining about being poor
You argument is flawed. You say having less "state" and more private business is always bad. That's ideology. What is bad are oligopolies, lobbyism and little social mobility... as it's bad when governments's wealth redistrubution reduces meritocracy, create nepotism politics or useless public entities to give fake jobs (see south america). If reducing State control is done by being open to small businesses, competition and meritocracy, the common citizen doesn't lose out at all.
She explained why the left viewed him as unpopular, but not the right. Again the lack of deeply understanding why the right wing and the traditional values are becoming so popular is shamefull. The cultural war that many countries are facing every single say is never mentioned. Those people live in a bubble.
If social issues are what drives you to such a level of uncomfortablity you become politically active on those grounds alone then centrism has done you well bc your economic position has not been threatened.
I’m afraid people are in for a bitter surprise if you think cultural issues matter more than questions of foreign security and global economy. If war continues in Europe, or worse, if our friends lose it and our opponent gains Europe’s largest country with its resources and tens of millions of people, your culture issues won’t matter. If they gain the fourth largest grain exporting country, Europe’s largest uranium reserves for our nuclear energy, Europe’s largest fertiliser exporting country etc., what do you think this will do to food and energy prices? Also, if you care about migration, you probably should want to stop the country than purposefully created the Syrian refugee crisis, who works hard to create a new refugee crises from Africa and Middle East, and who created the largest refugee crises since the second world war. If people vote for parties due to cultural issues but these parties are friendly with our enemies, receive money from them and degrade our ability to resist them… you may find you will lose your cultural war anyway but will also have to fight a real or hybrid one. One would expect better clarity for Europe’s once pre-eminent superpower. But clearly the labels on toilets are more important.
@@karelkieslich6772 I don't think you understand that people motivated by culture war do not see foreign adversaries like Russia and China as their adversaries. These folks view their own countrymen as enemies. They would much rather live in a world where Russia controls that and prices are high if it means they can call people the f slur.
Because the right wing are npcs driven by propaganda. A lot of the far right voters don't even care about the culture war or traditional values (far right don't represent them anyway, they are neolibs). They just don't like foreigners. That's it.
Judge by policy, not by some label like "centrist" or whatever. Macron has been implementing integrationist policies favored by RN, is that fence riding now? When the RN promises to renationalize the highways is that not a left-wing policy? When the NFP promises to cancel the accord with Mercosur and CETA with Canada for the supposed benefit of the peasants is that not a right-wing policy?
@soundscape26 "I'm not Marine Le Pen" that's how he won. But the French didn't necessarily agree with his politics, but had enough trust to block the far right from entering. Hence, they call it the "barrage" - to blocking the far right. But lost the parliamentary elections in 2022 and will this time again in 2024 by that same party.
Perfectly summarized. As a French left-leaning voter, back in 2017 when Macron first ran on a "both left and right" type platform, I didn't expect him to be my cup of tea, but I still thought he'd be somewhat palatable. Never would I have imagined him drifting so much to the right. He passed an anti-Muslim (anti-separatism) law. Several laws to give more leeway to the police, including *a law punishing people who film the police that was passed just a few months after George Floyd's death, and a week after a high-profile case of the police being filmed beating down a Black man who was just going back home in Paris* (though that part was later censored by the Supreme Court). He passed a hardline anti-immigration law. He did nothing on climate change, and even rolled back on things that had been done before him. He recently called the left "immigrationist" and criticized its platform for making gender transition too simple. I could go on and on. His strategy seems to have been, in essence: go always more to the right while also posing as if the political debate was just between him and the far-right and pretending the left didn't exist. He thought he'd keep being the "only safe option" forever. That came biting him in the *ss. But he won't suffer from it. Marginalized people will.
@@fyodordmitrenko622 Ataturk was a consummate nationalist, Churchill was an unapologetic Imperialist, De Gaulle was an authoritarian asshole that proceeded to use the Vichy French and nazi structures to his advantage after the war, Pilsudski was in all honesty mostly weird brand of nationalist (that became an authoritarian asshole later, which was a real shame) and I'd hardly call FDR a centrist considering all the shit he pulled.
Raising the retirement age was critical. The French are lazy and love socialism too much but it saves them from austerity measures. Or at least buys them more time
The biggest problem is that the French refuse to see that you cant have 100+ holidays, pension at 60, unlimited sick leave (etc etc) without paying for it.
I think something needs to be understood about current French politics : Macron's party is not centrist. You often hear about French politics that there's the far left, the centrists and the far right nowadays. It needs to be said : This is a failure on the part of the media, the truth is the "far left" has been officially designated as left by a statute of the state council, that at the same time confirmed that the Rassemblement National is indeed far right. While it is easy to check that the left of today does not in fact support a far left agenda, we also have to look at the way the parties have voted and in that regard it becomes obvious that the "centrist" party of Macron is just as far right as the R.N except on very few subjects mainly immigration. And for those that wondered about the historic right, they rallied to the far right and vote basically as the RN does. So in conclusion, there's the left, the right of Macron and the far right. While politics has shifted to the right for a long time, its transition has been accelerated by the last few years under the rule of Macron, and I believe that might have a lot to do with the way we label those parties ; It is very important to review the politics and history of each parties before labelling them extremes. And the French media has basically been bought by far right billionaires, there's that too
It is actually quite scary how many people fall for easy sounding "solutions" to complex problems and this is nowhere more evident than France's politics. France's population is aging and due to its already very high government spending/taxation, even aging by 1 year puts an enormous pressure on public services and working families. The far-right have this unshakable contradiction between wanting adequate public services and filling skill shortages while being completely opposed to immigration - the very thing which has helped France keep the fertility rate higher than other European countries which are experiencing huge brain drains and skills shortages. The far-left has a similar contradiction of wanting adequate public services while wanting the retirement age to go back down to 60 which is completely crazy given that France already spends a whopping 16 percent on pensions alone and backtracking on Macron's reforms predicted to cost a further €17 billion. Any sane economist looking at this and France's already unsustainable budget deficit would see that much of Front Populaire's manifesto is just a wishlist of overspending and borrowing pulled up in haste with no consideration for other countries using the euro which are more fiscally responsible (e.g. Germany, Netherlands, Finland). When Mitterrand lowered the retirement age to 60 in the 1980s, France's life expectancy was almost 10 years lower.... Macron has his flaws but at least he tried to address the reality of France's economic situation face-on when other presidents were just kicking the can down the road for a future minister to sort out.
A major issue I see for Macron is just... he's been in power too long. He's run out of momentum, and realistic policies or not, angered too many groups over time to stay. The same can be said of Canada's squishy centrist Liberals under Trudeau, or the rather blindly stumbling British Tories for a right wing example - tenures too long, accrued too many broken promises and scandals.
@@RatchetSly Wait till you hear how long the Social Democrats in Sweden ruled without interruption in the 20th century. You are correct abour broken promises and scandals, but what is the reason that makes you believe a new government would not be the same or worse in that regard? While having very different policies.
The "sensible" groups tend to ignore complaints of people they don't like. Then they get used to silencing and dehumanizing those people names like "extremists" (those names may be accurate but further push them away and into each others arms), making it impossible for them to come back to the center because they disagree on that one thing. Over time more and more people will at one point or another disagree with them and agree with the extremists on some minor point, be called an extremist, and be pushed into liking them more and disliking the centrists less. I have seen it happen online in the communities I participated in dozens of times live. It's the same every time. Do not call people extremes or dismiss their concerns. Instead work with them to resolve the problem.
Completely agree with you. As a Frenchman, tomorrow I will have the choice between, Pest, Cholera and Covid. Of course, as I'm vaccinated, I will choose Covid...
Mr Bompard representative for France Unbound made it pretty clear that the NFP's objective is to allow people to take an early retirement at 60 years old but that does not mean that he would be entitled to all pension they would have had if they haven't worked for 40 consecutive years
Electorate: Wants change Moderate or Centrist: Promises change whilst only wanted to preserve the status quo Electorate: Vote for Centrist or Moderate Centrist: Doesn’t do what they campaigned on, but does exactly what a status quo politician does Electorate: Is angry, and demands change Centrist: Vilifies actual politicians with good plans and policies and decides, whilst deciding the far right is OK enough to deal with Far Right: Promises change whilst wanting to push regressive policies and also backstabs centrist Centrist: Is upset at betrayal, despite history saying this is exactly what happens when siding with the Far Right, and urges electorate to vote for Moderate or Centrist candidates, whilst not doing anything to help their people, and instead enacting the regressive policies the Far Right want, in order to appeal to the Far Right’s voter base Electorate: Hate Centrist. Centrist approval ratings in the gutter, and Far Right appeasement doesn’t work Centrist: Continues vilifying progressive and leftist candidates, who want them to do better and push for change that helps the people Electorate: Vote for Far Right in next election, even when Left tries to warn Centrist, this is bad Country: Takes a massive shift to the right and regressive policies are being implemented, started by the centrist, even when this is against what the centrist wanted Centrist: Surprised Pikachu Face
scince the 70's. 50 years of softs clowns. now we have the possibility to see a far left vs far right in the next election! things back to normal at long last.
@@evonne_o Lol "pivot" he's the hand puppet of Blair who has been the status quo for over two decades. How naive are you that you genuinely think he will change anything when every leader since Blair has been a Blairite.
Overall I think France is just a nearly unreformable mess as a state with too much hard left/hard-right wing ideological fervor. Pretty much every French President in the past 30-40 years has polled miserably after their first 4-5 years in office and become extremely unpopular. There's room for both big government social democracy and neoliberal policy aimed at trade & market liberalization (Scandinavian countries, Germany and the Netherlands all prove as much), but France's democracy seems seem more systemically dysfunctional and incapable of moving past that dysfunction. Rather the dysfunction just evolves and each French President ends their tenure extremely unpopular, not able to achieve most of the ambitious reforms they ran on when they were first elected etc.
@@Godzilla52 lol no france and the eu is ruined by this baseless desire to neuter its wings and remain arrogantly centrist beyond the wishes of the people
Half the people think he goes too far? The other half think he doesn’t go too far enough?
John Jackson and Jack Johnson!
That's literally the definition of center 😂
The other half *sees that he's only in power to preserve the transfer of wealth and compromise towards the right.
Well, if he gave both ends of the political spectrum what they wanted and needed (within reason), he'd still be in the center and likely be less hated.
Welcome in France
Please give her more airtime, I love her professional, composed and well made reports - and bonus point, she's the only colleague who can pronounce foreign words properly! Bien joué ;)
Georgia does the French stuff while Nadja does the Slavic language stuff. Makes sense to use people who speak the languages.
Brits find it easier to hire native speakers rather than learn new pronunciation themselves 😂
All of what you said, plus I am glad to see the diversity. I have no idea how most international news is presented, as I live in a very rural area of the US with mostly people in my Native tribe, but here women are co-anchors. I'm a middle aged minority and I grew up seeing nothing but white men. I still see mostly white men. Warms my heart to see the younger generation do things right when they run things.
*edit* I honestly don't think she's a diversity hire, realized my statement could be taken that way or seen as an insult. I honestly think TLDR didn't even consider this. That's why my heart is warmed. Where I live the Christian Bible is being forced taught in public schools, while teachers (like I was) are fleeing en mass because they can suffer legal consequences for stating that slavery was a racial issue/don't want to teach the Bible. Our news casters don't even mention it.
Her reporting is horrible
Simp
Have you considered he might be unpopular because he's a politician in France?
trueeee
He's a politician in the West, as France isn't the only Western country with generalized discontent right now. If this was the only factor, however, Macron would still remain in charge despite discontent ; just like Sanchez in Spain.
You do realize there are popular candidates and politicians, right? Just cause they aren't as famous as the ones who are shit dosent make them not exist.
The sad thing is this isn't even really a joke. If you look at the polling for French Presidents over the past 30-40 years, they all become extremely unpopular around the 4-5 year mark. The countries electorate is fickle and slow/resistant to change with the hyper-partisan left and right wing blocs are very combative to basically anyone that's not as ideologically pure as they are. I'll be surprised if the next two or three President's after Macron can somehow break the cycle.
Its management went down the drain because initially it was some kind of fucking theater. Attempts to push his wife into management positions, to make her the first lady, statements that he is not able to manage without her and they will make decisions together. This theater, when after Russia’s attack on Ukraine he changed into sweatshirts and pretended to be concerned, copying Zelensky. And his tone when he advised the protesting farmers to do something useful. It's theater after theater. And then three billions of government money disappeared, oh. Crime and unemployment are through the roof and there is nothing he can do. But the name champagne may now only apply to sparkling wines from the Champagne region.The same thing with cognac. Well, they returned the historical blue tint on the French flag, they did a very important thing🤦♀️. He set up his own playground from France and now threw out the tantrum because they didn’t like him.
I'm French, living in France, and I approve everything said in this video. Very clear, very informative, non-partisan, well-informed : Two thumbs up 👍👍, and Merci.
D'accord! 🇫🇷🏴
Tu as bien raison
There is an important omission about the immigration law. It was censored by the Constitutional Council and its harsher articles were removed. Morever, this law was harsher because LR refused to vote the initial law and Macron didn't wanted to use yet another 49.3.
He also knew that most of what was added by the LR dominated senate would be stripped off by the constituional council, and that's exactly what happened.
Macron never really intended to make a harsh immigration law, and taking action on this issue isn't going after the RN votes which he would never get anyway, it's just listening to an opinion that is majority among French people.
Are you a leftist, a rightist or a macron supporter?
@@guillaumeroussel8633 You know, it's made for people who are not awarded of all the subtilities of French politics. So, they apply the KISS principle : "Keep it simple stupid !" 😁
Arrogant? The dude dubs himself 'Jupiter'...
Megalomania?
Really??
The press called him that not him but he is still arrogant enough to deserve it.
@@ctrlzed5132 Darn, you saw right through my exaggeration for dramatic purposes! ;-)
I'm not French, so my opinion:
a) matters much less (ie, I can't very much influence today's elections' outcomes) and
b) is to be taken very a big grain of salt (I'm an avid reader of "Le canard enchaîné", which is rarely kind to the president; so my opinion is biased).
Still, the man sees France like a plucky "start-up" nation and fancies himself a savvy CEO but behaves more like a dictator. He has quite a few issues to work on on a personal level. Anyway, that's what the French are stuck with for the foreseeable future and I wish them well; yet, I'd be lying if were to say seeing him lose his big gamble wouldn't put a ginormous grin on my face :-D
Speaking of Jupiter, I just released some methane gas and it smells like something crawled up my ass and died
Kinda find it funny the fact that everyone in the comments dislikes macron so much both right and left keep trying to push him to the other side of the spectrum lmao
This is why i am a radical centrist. Not left or right, forward.
I can image a form of centrism which pragmatically combines the most popular and successful ideas from the left and right. Currently, most mainstream centrist parties seem to combine the worst of both, to the benefit of the small elite who fund them. Like privatizing gains and socializing losses.
@Minimmalmythicist That’s quite an interesting theory. I’ve long thought of liberal social democracy as being the reasonable synthesis between capitalism and socialism. But I’d never really considered that the threat of communist revolution might be necessary to make that happen.
@Minimmalmythicist I do think there’s a reasonable case to be made that the net migration rate should never be higher than the number of homes we’re building though.
It’s just deeply unfair to drive up people’s rents and force them to move into smaller homes.
We could choose to build more homes or fewer. But either way the homes should have to be built _before_ we issue hundreds of thousands more visas.
Yip this
Centrism is completely captured by a small elite
@user-tz9wk2rj2dthere was 125,000 commonwealth immigrant in 1961 then add the Irish and consider the population as a-whole was small
Like what lmao progressive spending and no taxation?
Centrism can be effective when you build a social concensus, are effective and have your own principles.
It's not about being a vacuum of values, it's about being a moderate in the means or at least dialogue while having very clear how you want your country to look.
Macron didn't have commitment to a national vision for France, he was the response to the national visions of those perceived as more radical than himself.
Hence, he couldn't ever have had that much momentum, especially if his competent centrism didn't actually deliver on the competence part.
Well said
Sadly, these days "centrists" are more often than not useful idiots for the right who can't identify when one side of the isle has completely lost the plot, rather than actually meaningfully moderate.
"centrism" on that case being just neoliberalism with traditional conservative and liberal policies, there ain't a single "centrist" policy made on that goverment, whatever would that mean
Centrism by its very definition isn’t competent. They never get anything done, uphold the establishment and drive the working class into fascists arms. Neo-liberal policies always lack any real benefit for the average people, and this allowed the right wing to peel off voters with social issues.
Macron istcentrist he is left
There has been nothing centrist about Macron's policy...
What are you talking about? Their centrists because everyone to the right of him thinks he's left and everyone left of him thinks he's right wing... that's what centrism is. If you don't think he's center you're a super extremist.
Correct, it was always leftist.
@@Kalimdor199Menegroth The fact that the leftists are saying he was always rightist, seems to contradict that. If anything that shows that Macron himself is fairly centrist going by the left and right wing's reactions to him.
@@Kalimdor199Menegroththat depends only on who you ask
@@Kalimdor199Menegroth Mind telling us what about Macron's policy was so left? If not, you're just another bot
Ok, as a French, I have to speak politics of my country,
1- When Macron went to power, he promised to raise the age of retirement from 60 to 65, in 2023 the age of retirement would be 61, 62 for 2024, all this whilst not affecting people who would retire in said yeas and etc... but he quickly said 'F*ck all' and raised it to 65 as well as halted the possibility to retire to those who wanted to retire.
2- The shooting of the Algerian teen was after he drove over the speed limit, refused to stop after police biker's attempted to stop him, the teen almost killed several people on the way, and the only way to stop the chase was to shoot him when he got stuck in traffic, the cops tried to make him give up, when he saw a chance, he tried getting away, AGAIN, which was when he got shoot, the cops even warned him that if he drove away they'd shoot him, guess what he did? he drove away, the cops merely followed up with their promise and light him up.
There is footage of the shooting online, look it up in French and you'll see what I mean.
Hmmm... QU'EST-CE QUE TU RACONTES ? Déjà l'âge de retraite était à 62 avant Macron hein c'est Sarkozy qui est passé de 60 à 62. ET PUIS MACRON L'A AUGMENTE A 64 PAS A 65 ? Donc déjà ton premier point j'ai jamais vu autant de fausses infos stupides dans une même phrase, ça montre juste un manque évident de culture politique. Chuis pas macroniste je cherche pas à le défendre là mais je peux juste pas te laisser raconter n'importe quoi, il a augmenté la retraite de 2 ans pas de 5 ans, et puis j'ai pas compris le délire de "61, 62 en 2024" ça pouvait pas être 61 vu que depuis Sarkozy c'est déjà à 62, la seule promesse que Macron a fait qu'il a pas tenu c'est de NE PAS TOUCHER aux retraites.
Pour ton deuxième point, NON, il n'a pas roulé à plus que la limite de vitesse, il était reproché de rouler SANS PERMIS. Mais il n'a jamais mis en danger quique ce soit dans sa course, évidemment si c'était un taré qui fonçait sur les trottoirs, dans des gens, etc. y aurait pas eu de soutien, sauf que non. C'était un ado en train de faire une bêtise, mais qui restait humain, il n'avait pas envie de mettre en danger quique ce soit, il SAVAIT conduire, il avait pas de permis mais il a du l'apprendre d'autre part car 5 minutes de course poursuite sans faire de mal à quique ce soit c'est pas n'importe qui qui peut y arriver. Et puis non sur la vidéo les policiers ne le "menacent" pas, on en entend clairement un dire "Shoot le" à celui qui a le pistolet, avant même que Nahel démarre, Nahel a littéralement fui pour sa vie car les policiers le menaçaient pas de lui tirer dessus s'il roulait, mais ils disaient clairement qu'ils comptaient lui tirer dessus direct même s'il restait immobile.
@@Kephy_ Alors je suis seulment une victimes de fake news alors, principalement dans le côté de l'âge de retraite.
Tous se que j'ai dit c'est les choses que j'ai étendue dans les journal, est même si j'ai dis des faux info, Macron aurais jamais dû changer l'âge de retraite.
Après si t'as des bonnes sources, envoi-le moi ici, merci.
Après, quant à l'Algérie, une voiture c'est sa peut-être une armé mortelle, ils c'est fait tirés seulment apres qu'il à mis le pied sur l'accélérateur, là même raison que les flics Américain veulent finirs les course de poursuite le plus vîtes, pour éviter que des gents meur, tu peux aussi bien défendre l'Algérien avec la psychologie humaine, qu'ils avait peur, mes quand tas deux mecs avec des armée pointé vers toi, tu suis leurs ordres, si c'est des flic, tu gagne pas la lutte dans la rue, tu là gagne devant un juge.
Même s'il ont pas menacé directement, avoir des armés pointé vers toi sa devrait être un signal que tu devrais coopère avec les flic, même si ils finit en prison, ils serais vivant.
Peut importe que ils savais conduire où pas, t'as pas de permis, ne conduit pas, fin d'histoire.
Encore une fois, si t'as des bonnes sources, envoi-le moi ici.
@@Kephy_ j'avais envoyé 3 paragraphes, bah RUclips m'a dit "fuck you" et ça pas envoyé, donc je fais un résumé.
Mes infos sont dû journal pour l'âge de retraite, apres, si t'as des meilleurs sources, merci de les envoyer.
Après, quant à l'Algerien:
1. Il avait rien à faire d'arrière un volant sans supervision d'un adulte responsable avec permission.
2. Tu peux "savoir" conduire, met si tu fais un accident, là faute c'est directement à tois.
3. Quand t'as des armés pointé a tois, spécialement des flics, tu commence pas à accélérer, dans la vidéo, oui ils ont ouvert feu apres que ils dîtes pour tires, aussi, les flic sont aussi humain, oui, il y à des mauvaise pomme partout, inclus d'ans la Police, dans la position d'un flic, t'as un mec d'arrière le volant qu'il refusé d'arrêté la voiture, il veut pas coopérer avec toi, qu'il commence directement à accélère le moment qu'ils peut, si tu l'arrêté pas il finiras par tuer quelqu'un, les Américains sont un bon example de sa, tous se qu'ils faut c'est qu'ils rentré en panique est qu'il faîtes un mauvais tour est ils peut se tuer, tuer les passagers est peut-être une famille dans une autre voiture, une voiture, n'importe qui là conduit, cest une armé mortelle tel comme une arme de feu.
Est-ce que la police pourrait avoir fait mieux, peut-être, à la fin de la journée, c'est fait, c'est fait, je pense même que les flic se sont fais punir, j'avais pas trop vue sûr le pos-incident.
Article 49.3, in a democracy that goes through the trouble of having two rounds to assure proportional representation, is just 🤯
It’s like the Notwithstanding clause in Canada that just allows the federal or provincial government to ignore certain sections in the constitution like fundamental freedoms( freedom of religion, peaceful assembly, thought,etc), legal rights(not to be arbitrarily detained,etc) and equality rights( no discrimination). Thankfully it doesn’t apply to democratic rights but still
The French electoral system is not proportional, and using the article 49.3 is democratic, constitutional and legal
The "idea" of the 49.3 is to let the prime minister pass important votes if the Parliament is stalling too much or too fractured. It's a pretty controversial tool, but it comes with several caveats. The main one is that a 49.3 automatically triggers a vote of no confidence against the prime minister.
If the government wins, the law passes. If they lose, the law is scrapped and the prime minister is fired, together with *the whole government*. The president has to choose a new prime minister, who must be approved by the parliament, and who will build a new government.
Also, it's the *prime minister*, not the president that calls for a 49.3. During Macron's government, this difference was moot because he had enough votes to choose a prime minister aligned with him.
During a co-habitation, when the parliament and the president are not aligned (and which will probably be the scenario for the next two years), the president cannot force a law with this tool.
@@TheRodcoIt isn't proportional in the official sense but unlike most FPTP-systems it applies a two-round system which in turn makes the result more proportional than say the british parliamentary election.
And of course it is legal and constitutional, it is in the constitution. But that doesn't make something right in and of itself. It could be argued to be democratic, also necessary as a last resort. But it is inherently an article which allows the president to bypass a democratically elected assembly, it is necessary for executive efficiency but at the expense of "the peoples will" and the representation of it in the government in the form of the parliament.
Both efficiency and representation matter in a democracy although it being used so frequently certainly isn't to be preferred.
So ... I wrote a longer comment, but youtube decided to send it to the void ...
Long story short, the 49.3 is controversial, but it has a big caveat: the law doesn't pass automatically, the 49.3 forces a vote of no confidence against the prime minister. If they lose it, the law is scrapped, as well as the whole government. The president then has to build a new one. Also, it's the prime minister that calls for a 49.3, not the president. If both are aligned (which was the case during most of Macron's government), this point is moot. But, if they're not, a president cannot use it to force a law.
Once you factor in inflation the GDP per person has been going down in French since, at least, 2000. This is pretty much similar in all developed countries, with only a few exceptions, such as Japan and perhaps South Korea. When people see their living standards going down, then people get grumpy and it really does not matter what side of politics you are from. I am certain there are a long list of other minor reasons as all governments, the longer you are in power, the more people you end up annoying.
64 retirement age is still below what other European countrie have. What do the French expect? Life expectancy has risen, university studies take more and more time. The average years in retirement should be less than the years doing full time jobs.
Do what you want in your countries, if you want to die working it's your problem . Our system is sustainable despite what macron said, so this reform has to and will be suppress
Brilliant ad for new jobs with Sunak though...subtle🤣But yeah, Rishi is going down very soon...
TBH the British election is a much more local affair with little consequence outside the UK. But the French election will have some impact on 450 million EUropeans, Ukraine, and the Eurozone, among others. In that sense, it's significantly more important than the British election.
I wonder if the seemingly inevitable landslide which is set to happen between both rounds may energize the French left of center electorate though ...
I literally just realized the California thing also referred to Sunak
Macron...arrogant? Shocking. Where is the taxing of the rich?
Taxing of the rich? He worked for the Rothschild🤣I don't think he'd ever tax his owners.
He's not taxing the rich?
In France if you make 100k a year net, you have already paid 145k to the state (110k in social contributions, 35k in income taxes).
Your employer has to pay 245k for you to get 100k to spend.
And that's before paying your other taxes!
And that's with Macron having had full control of the parliament.
Keep it real, in France the rich are paying their fair share (and they're usually okay with it otherwise they would have left)
@@huguesjouffrai9618 100K a year you're talking about middle class. Of course those and lower class are the one's who pay the taxes of the likes of Bernard Arnault. Those are the real rich that instead of paying taxes are actually milking it as much as they can.
This is very accurate, from a person living in France. Keep on with the good work, and merci beaucoup!
People talking about centrism in the comments 😂 Centrism DOES exist! There is not only black and white! Some people have more right views on certain topics and more left on others
He’s always represented the status quo. Why would anyone wanting change vote for him?
The pension system bankrupting the state was the status quo. He tried doing something about that and there was a revolt.
I have to retire at 67 in the Netherlands. The French revolt for retiring at 62. Sure, you do you.
But thanks to the Euro I'm now also liable for french debt. Interest rates will be kept low to save France and a side effect is me getting absolutely fucked trying to enter the housing market.
The pension system was doing fine, so said many studies. Even going into excedents. Macron just wanted to make the country and the rich richer and the poor poorer and dead right after retirement.
Never saw him representing the status quo. He's one of the most vocal voices on the European stage for change, wanting to reform the EU. And he tackled long overdue issues like the pension reform that are naturally unpopular but for the greater benefit of the country.
@@Jajalaatmaar Small correction as a Frenchman: the legal age to start retiring is 64 but to get a full pension it's 67.
Front Populaire proposes 60/64 and RN 62/66
Well still better than the left, but surely they'll think the same with the right. If there was a centrist or even kind of leftist party against immigration it would win everywhere.
According to the neoliberal The Economist: "Much of the credit belongs to Emmanuel Macron. His seven years as president have seen a sustained effort to remake France as a modern, business-friendly economy. He has reformed employment to encourage bosses to take on workers. Since he moved into the Elysée in 2017, 2m jobs have been created and over 6m businesses set up. He has cut business taxes, along with stifling wealth taxes. He has boosted education and started to reform the unaffordable pension system. France’s growth is above the euro-zone average, and poverty rates below it."
Guess who owns the Economist , his ex employer and wife's relatives. Best ignore .
He who tries to please everyone, pleases no-one.
The problem isn't raising the pension age but setting a higher one for all job sectors. Bureaucrats and office workers can work longer but hard physical labour cannot.
They can because they start later than in the past
White collar jobs are strongly associated with chronic stress and burnout which also lead to poor quality of life. Blue collar is indeed physically demanding (improved a lot with modern technology, if employers follow the safety standards ofc), but it doesn't usually require any decision making, time management or much interaction with corny customers, partners or even public institutions. Mentally consuming stuff which can also affect individuals physically in the longterm run (headaches, insomnia, disorders etc). Also, blue collar is strictly restricted at the workplace, unlike white collar employees who usually have to do a lot of preparation, research, work on projects close to their deadline etc at home.
The problem was doing it for no real reason, he made economist made a study on the future of how well the today's (perfectly fonctioning) service would work in many years, but forced them not to consider the real situation of France under his mandate. The economists published a model where after his mandate the situation "crashed" to return to reality, and this "crash" would have potentially stop pensions from functioning after a few years in the worst cases...
It was obviously a right economical policy with objective to increase labor supply and diminish salaries, that no one in the electorate actually want...
@@L425-g1f Raising the pension age not only HAS real reasons, it is practically unavoidable and not only in France but everywhere. Life expectancy is rising continually and the demographic structure makes paying for pensions even more difficult. You need immigration to pay for that but this increases house prices and rents - along with all the problems scared right-wingers will create including voting for openly authoritarian parties.
Other EU countries have had significantly higher pension ages for decades. If safety procedures are met, physically demanding jobs do not decrease lifespan or ability to work. Labour safety standards are the solution to this issue.
The problem with modern politics is that everyone is fixated on the left vs the right while ignoring the other part of the political spectrum, authoritarianism vs liberalism. Yes Macron is a centrist. But he's also *extremely* authoritarian. Which is what people actually hate about him, not his centrist policies.
Bang on as you won't see the left and the right coming together to get rid of him. The MSN should know this
All reformist politicians are. You have to break some eggs to make an omelette, as Saxons say.
Actually, no, in France, people do hate the centre, the dominant policy trends that have been in place for the last thirty years. You're welcome to look up polling data on what people think of immigration, the pensions reform, etc.
Authority can be popular you just need the right person to make it popular
How the fck is he authoritarian? He just threw his lead in parliament to democracy willingly. Every thing he did as far as I know was not anti-democratic
I'm not French so maybe there's something I don't know, but generally from what I've seen Macron's decline is due to actions under his administration, not the decline of centrism as an ideology, I predict Macron's party will have a period of losses but if a new popular face that sticks to centrism is introduced they might come back in the distant future.
It is not "Ukraine's impact", it is "the consequences of the Russian war on Ukraine". RHETORIC MATTERS!
Agreed, pretty slack after 2 years.
Get a grip nobody cares.
@@ronmastrio2798 you get a grip
Macron's centrism is unpopular in France for many reasons, one of them being that it's actually right-wing policies masked under a centrist veil. But he does most of what Le Pen would do, without being a fascist 70% of the time.
Either way. People vote when babies get stabbed in playgrounds. Not much else matters
_"People are fed up with Neoliberalism. I know what we need! _*_MORE_*_ Neoliberalism!"_
Macron isn’t really that liberal tbh
@comicbutserious263 his economic stance is undeniably neoliberalism
@@comicbutserious263 Do some online research. Neo-liberalism is economically the opposite of liberalism.
@@ElBandito "Do some online research" while pushing American restricted understanding of economical ideologies...
@@ElBandito Neo-liberalism is opposite of american liberalism
Turns out people dont want the status quo when life currently sucks.
Life has never sucked less in the history of mankind.
@@JHBG19712005
@@JHBG1971 That's pretty much true other than like the last 30-50 years in western countries. Not being able to afford a house and family and becoming an ethnic minority in you own city in a few decades really has people scared.
He's not really a centrist, he's a neoliberal. If you want an American comparison, it's George W. Bush. Now, I actually don't mind neoliberalism, I grew up with the ideology. But it has some real blind spots when it comes to culture and immigration.
More like Reagan
What? Clinton is a neoliberal, George W is a neocon. Macron would definitely be left of center than George W on cultural issues. George W is Methodist, while Macron is not religious or identifies as such…unless he is Christian, as I could be wrong if there’s something I don’t know.
@@tinofsardines I don't think there's all that much different between neocons and neoliberals.
Definitely more bill Clinton or tony Blair rather than George W. Bush...
@@michaelwellen2866Both are pro war, pro immigration and are controlled by central bankers.
Hate how everything is 'far right' like it's some sort of militia. Just say right wing. The RN aren't some military dictatorship
Thanks for the information. I'm French, and this is very informative, especially as a summary of the news and what could have caused them.
Centrism will never get anyone excited. It's up to the candidate to sell this extremely unsatisfying platform.
I think what would be very interesting would be to show analysis like this for other countries in EU. For example I’d love to know what’s going on in Greece, Portugal, Estonia, Cyprus… France and Germany might be the most populous countries but this channel is called EU so it would be good ❤
Just to say the 2:15 map is incorrect
Far right is way stronger in the north and east while left is stronger in south west and Britanny but I guess it was just to give an example
Macron needs to stop pushing the soft centre policies and go for the hardline far centre vote.
yes, to the left he should go. steal that 29% vote from NFP.
No such thing as far center. In fact, given that what is currently labeled as 'far right' was just center-right 15 years ago then I doubt there is such thing as 'center' either unless it is just a mix of left and right politices.
@@Hardcore_Remixer I disagree. Someone came up with the phrase ‘extreme centre of British politics’ and France is just like Britain. I think that ‘far centre’ is just recasting ‘extreme centre’ and extreme centre rings true. The political centre has given us: biggest war crime of the century (Iraq 2003); biggest war crime of 2010s (Libya 2011); and absolute support for biggest war crime of 2020s (genocide in Gaza). War crimes and genocide exemplify extremism. The centre is extremist.
@@minsapint8007 Because 'the center' is just a combination of left and right. I guess that by extreme center you mean extreme left and extreme right wing policies. Being economically right wing and socially left wing doesn't make you center on their economical or social terms.
I haven't got to see Netanyahu's policies, but given that he wants to get rid of the Palestinians from Gaza then I can tell he is socially (and geopolitically) right wing and not center by all means.
You can also have a look at China. Communist political system with capitalist economy. Does this make them center?
Even the 2D one is an extreme summarization of the reality and misses some details, but the 1D political spectrum is simply misleading.
However, Macron's only right wing policy I have seen is the raising of the retirement age.
@@Hardcore_Remixer I’m not sure that expanding the leeway for police conduct could be described as a left or center policy. But then again, there’s nothing that necessarily conflicts with a police state anywhere on the simple left right spectrum.
Although the whole immigration law episode was indeed an ideological win for the national rally, the harder law didn't come from his party but from the more right leaning republicans that still have a majority in the senate (despite representing around 5% of the votes in latest national elections) and amended the original version of the government. Nonetheless, all hard measures included within this version were declared unconstitutional by the constitutional court after Macron asked them to examínate It, and we ended up with an immigration law that is very similar to the one his government first proposed.
It was a short term victory for his party, but I think this whole process ended up nourishing the anti establishment feeling against his party and institutions like the constitutional court that was seen by many as more of a political than a judicial institution, acting ideologically (many of its member being former left wing politicians with no background in Law). With that plus the fact that according to polls, the french public was overwhelmingly backing the harder version of the law, I don't think we can say it was a good move for Macron's popularity.
I was hearing a couple days ago Macron called the election to dare them to actually govern. I’m guessing that wasn’t the case?
We don't know what he was thinking. In my opinion he envisioned several possibilities and figured they were all better than the situation he was in. He would have probably had to call elections after summer anyways because there was no way to pass next years' budget.
He's not a centrist, and he's overstayed his welcome.
keep ignoring growing income inequality and you get fascism
That’s sounds great. I’ll take anything over what we have currently.
@@deadlyoneable cool and normal response
Income inequality isn't growing in France and is very low (after taxes and benefits).
Instead of pushing through leguslation without parliamentary approval, he should have tried to forge issue related alliances and find compromises. Maybe then public unrest wouldn't have been as bad as it was and partially still is.
Looks like his arrogance is coasting him
Nobody likes the extreme center!
the extreme fascist right "wing"
globalism?
Everyone does after a few years with far right or left.
After years of lunatics from the far left or the far right, you will wish for those boring centrists
To be fair to Macron, *all* French presidents are unpopular - this is country whose founding myth is the French revolution, whose national identity is built on suspicion of those in power.
Macron actually did okay to win a second term, something neither Sarkozy nor Hollande before him managed. And before that, Mitterand and Chirac had to experience periods of cohabitation, just like Macron is going to have to do now. So from a historical perspective he's only averagely unpopular for a French president, maybe even a little bit better than average.
I still find it insane that there were mass riots over the retirement age being raised to 64. France has a life expectancy of 82. The old system had people collecting pensions for nearly 1/3 of their adult life.
Well people don't want higher retirement age and immigration cause it devalues work. Less people = higher wages. Business and Goverment obviously doesn't want that as they will pay for it. It's classic case of dychotomy between county&society wants. If one want to be devil advocate he can argue that there is also economy that might not work the way society wants. Economy can just collapse. But yet it doesn't matter for growing part of society - if economy collapses in 10-20 years but person itself has only estimated 5 years left of life what does it matter to him/her? So people want to maximize their life enjoyment and after them the world can end for all they care ;)
Quite the half-assed job this time, completely overlooking one of the simplest reasons why Macron was hated in the first place: The man itself. He's selfish, arrogant, shows no restraint when he insults a large part of french population and lavishly rains money on the already rich people and business. All of this while surrounding himself with traitors from both the left and right wing, business people with no experience and no morality, and finally, his past job and behavior during Hollande's era.
It didn't take long for people, especially the rural world to hate him: he doesn't care about France nor the french. Only about himself, his friends and business. This channel totally failed to notice it.
Perhaps your comment is the half-assed job here lol.
@@wendigotea6020 Perhaps. I mean, i live in France, follow France's political circus since decades, and have to deal with whatever crap comes out of it like everyone else.
So yeah. Who am i to know what french people think about him?
@@padriandusk7107 You’ve clearly taken the shortcut to criticism by relying on tired personal attacks and oversimplifications rather than diving into the real complexities of Macron’s presidency. Calling him "selfish" and "arrogant" is a lazy way of dismissing the nuanced and often contentious decisions he had to make as president. You act like his policies are all about lavishly favoring the rich, but fail to acknowledge that his economic reforms were driven by long-term growth strategies that critics and supporters alike argue about. As for the "traitors" in his coalition, maybe his attempt to unite the left and right under a centrist banner isn’t as naive as you think it’s called trying to heal a divided country. Blaming him for rural discontent without addressing the bigger structural issues at play, like the environmental policies and systemic inequality, is typical of shallow analysis. Maybe next time, instead of throwing around buzzwords and insults, try understanding the broader picture this isn’t a reality show, it’s governance.
@wendigotea6020 I can also throw around names. Alexandre Benalla, Aurore Bergé, Alexis Kohler. Those names amongst others are why french people knows that man cares little about justice and fairness.
I can even throw around quotes: "I'm not here to protect existing jobs", "French workers earn too much", "France still mourns a king", "French workers must work more without earning more", "British were luck to have Thatcher(LOL)", "There's no french culture. I've never seen it", "A train station is a place where you come accross successful people and people who are nothing". Those quotes amongst others are why french people knows that man cares little about his country and its people.
What you think is irrelevant. I'm stating facts which, indeed, tires me to no end, tho i never had any hope to begin with regarding what would happen: For years, french people has been fed up with what corrupted, immoral people in politics have been doing and saying. They wanted change and many amongst them feared what would happen in the far left or the far right. Macron appeared and took everything he could from both the left and the right, in which noone believed anymore anyway.
The result was predictable: Macron won only because he found himself in a duel against Le Pen. And each time he won, he surrounded himself with EVERYTHING that made people angry prior to his election.
That's another reason why i know you know nothing about France and french people. And be honest: you don't care anyway. You just didn't like how i criticized the channel for ignoring the most flagrant signals about why french people hates Macron.
You won't change my mind, forged by first-hand experience in a country you probably never even approached with a finger on the map. I won't change your mind, forged by something i don't really want to imagine nor care, if it led to that kind of mindset.
Let's leave it at that. I'll happily criticize the channel each time it fails at analyzing properly what's going on in France.
Feel free to meet me there again. But i won't be looking for you. Noone should.
What do you mean "how it failed"? It doesn't matter how "centrist" or "reasonable" you are, you can't have unrestricted immigration and immigrant crime reigning supreme in every major city.
Macron is only a centrist by name. His policies, both economical and social have all been closer to the right than anything else. I struggle to recall anything he's done that could be considered left leaning to counteract this.
Moreover it's his repeated use of 49.3 and general disregard for the people's will in favor of helping big business, as well as tough répression on any form of contestation that led him to become so unpopular.
He allowed women to have kids without men, pretty left wing. He continued the insane spending, that's pretty left wing too.
@@aesma2522 neither of these issues lie on the left-right spectrum. The first is a personal freedom discussion, for the second you need to go into the details but generally spending above a nation's means is bipartisan.
@@Daniel-q9f8p In France our right wing is pretty conservative socially so yes it's left wing to vote for things like gay marriage, there was literally only one right wing MP that voted for that (and he's a gay man). Later he was a minister for Macron so he moved to the center.
I agree that if you look at the US the insane deficit spending is bipartisan but in the EU it isn't the case, running a tight ship is at least in theory still a common right-wing thing.
The opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in Paris will be very telling. I'm sure it will ultra PC.
Shocking. Centrist liberal with no interest in politics and views the electorate as an impediment to technocracy, while tacking right on social issues at every opportunity bar one fails to gain consent for governance long term. Truly shocking. There’s no way you could predict this. And leading the centre in this rightward direction has never ever before produced a rightwards shift in the electorate thereafter either, it’d sooooo unpreceddented. I just can’t imagine why a liberal who campaigns for nothing, thereby generating consent for their programme, who simply follows the polls on what to discuss lost control of the narrative, it’s just in comprehensible why a person who refuses to campaign for a position ends up talking about things on ground he is uncomfortable in, if only there was a class of people who had the power and ability to shape the national discussion.
Poor Macron.
As a non-European I must say he's one of the more tolerable political types in Europe tbh.
He'll have to do something big *AND* positive to keep going..
Pero, Macron tiene todavía poder político a pesar de que ganó la oposición de derecha más poder? 🤔
@@LZ130GraffZeppelinII Time will tell...
@@EgoHead710 Macron es necesario para el apoyo a Ucrania, los demócratas igual.
@@LZ130GraffZeppelinII Indeed.
Hopefully nothing bad happens over time.
@@EgoHead710
Aunque Biden debe ser reemplazado, qué opción hay?
I like how the first riot footage is from Rennes where I live !
My condolences
@@BirdEgg123 people need to fight back
@@failedrockstaragainst ixlamist extremism
@@failedrockstar my condolences that you live in France thoughts & prayers 🙏
nothing says justice like random property damage
What about the warmongering? I'm sure that's a factor too
Because centrism is utterly meaningless and completely relative to what is to the left and right of it. In this case what macron meant by centrist was the status quo, and nobody wanted that.
Saying he is status quo is quite a overgeneralation. His pension reforms were the farest things from status quo.
Didn't Macron break the status quo himself? Look where the traditional French parties are now.
@@catlover12045 true, and honestly that's the one policy of his I actually do support and pensions are honestly the one area the RN concerns me. But overall I think it's clear Macrons policies are just the same as the policies of all the elites and mainstream 'centrist' parties of Europe, and that's why I think he is still a status quo politician, even if he does break with it occasionally.
@@soundscape26 Breaking the status quo by acting exactly like liberal, centrist and centre-left parties all over Europe?
@@JamesL42 Many argue he's center-right... which makes sense given his economic policies.
Either way, it was him who broke the center right/center left duopoly in France.
The RN is not 'far right', it's notably command economy advocating. That's left wing.
but it is patriotic which nowadays is a right wing thing
The problem with centrism is it stands for nothing and everything all at the same time
Centrism is dying a death as it has no principles of it's own only what it borrows from time to time from the two poles
No principles no guiding compass .. after while people see through this
I disagree completely.
"The two poles", as you say, are filled with dogmatic thinkers, whereas the center is the home of pragmatic thinkers.
People do not "see through this". The problem is that many people are too dumb to understand nuanced, pragmatic solutions and they love the sound of on-the-nose, dogmatic solutions, although those latter solutions do not actually work.
@@EaglePicking Centrism has no basis other than what it borrows elsewhere
Perfectly legitimate to say centrism can and does take ideas and implement them in a less full way. It certainly contains a mix of both.
So in essence its the compromise position. Over time all compromises tend to failure .. birth rate case in point, a mix of compromise positions has led to a global baby shortage.
Ultimately it has no basis in and of itself it's a cuckoo philosophy
PS like a lot of centrists you reach for personal insults and attack .. calling people dumb is basically you admitting you have no actual position to defend
So you resort to insults, have a good day
@@EaglePickingcentrists are not as pragmatic as you think. They simply view themselves as such bc they defer to the status quo of the system of power they find themselves in. This isnt pragmatic this is an ideological commitment. The idea that the status quo is the best.
@@EaglePickingI love also that you demonstrate one of the massive flaws of centrists in their ability to attract support. You're smug. You think you've come to your position bc you're the smartest, most morally correct person capable of seeing things "rationally" or "realistically" and if anyone disagrees it's not bc there is merit in the criticism of your ideology or program, ones that should be taken in to account to improve your program and attract more people. No it's the people's fault for not being as smart and moral as you.
Foolish.
Being centrist neutral IS an ideology itself. Taking a bit of the left and a bit of the right, and fitting them to the need of one’s country. That is exactly what we need in 2024, transformative, flexible politics, not conservative hardliners of the left or right
5:35 isn't that graph supposed to be employment rate/labor participation rate rather then UN-employment? French Youth Unemployment is ~17% or so, give or take, no?
Because it's not " center", doesn't matter if you call it left or right- it's "anti West liberalism"
Yes. It's the corrupt vs. representatives of the people. They are illiberal, against freedom of religion, thought, and speech. Even some conservative parties have been corrupted here in Canada. Fortunately, we cleaned up the hidden "agents" inside the National Council running the Conservative party of Canada.Then we got rid of the fake-conservative leader Erin O'Toole, replacing him with Pierre Poilievre. But provincially, the Ontario Conservatives are corrupt under Doug Ford. The evil agents are everywhere such as the Ontario Law Society administering the bar, lawyer licensing, in Ontario Canada. Look up: Statement of Principles Ontario Law. The agents are everywhere: school boards, municipal city governments, etc... We must track them and expose them. Easy to find: They try to impose so many poison pilled "human rights". For example, erasing women and girl's rights to replace them with trans rights, forcing children to body negativity, choosing the "right body" and cut off what is "wrong." leading to regret and de-transitioning but who cannot function sexually or cannot have children. Too much to explain here but the liberal parties and centrist parties have pretty much all been taken over.
5:21 Private sector regulation or de-regulation? The audio and screen say different things
"Unless I win, there will be war!" Wow. What an egomaniac!
Remember when Trump said that “there will be a massacre” when he lost? The whole media, even here in Europe, was up in arms about the threat. But he said it between two arguments about why Democrats would “massacre” American industry. Imagine if the media treated Macron’s words the same way.
fr, he scared my grandparents from voting for the party they wanted to vote.
Centrist? Leftist…fixed it for you. Or by your language, far left.
"We protest your right wing policies!"
"Hey, let's elect a far right party!"
Genius! *slaps head*
Maybe, just maybe, you're a r3t4rd who has no idea what policies are in question and what the respective stances of the parties in question are on them?
The far right when it comes to economics is not really right leaning, they have more like left policies in their agenda but just for pure french citizens, excluding the rest. Never understood what we put them on the right except for their xenophobia
There is a massive error on the Unemployment Rate chart(at. 5:34) - the provided percentages are impossible. You are showing youth unemployment rate between 75 and 90% and overall unemployment between 55 -62%. Can you imagine what would happen if this was the case???!
Centrism is a non position and trying to care about everyone, effectively makes you care about no one specifically.
And there is no centrism because what's being called Centrist is actually left wing and pretty far left too.
He's president of the French Republic. Caring about everyone is the definition of the job.
Polarization of the society, if you doing thing that are not aligned with you opinion, you became the worst leader.
Vive la France 🇫🇷
Glory to the sixth Republic
"Even if they are not really his fault." It is nice to hear such claims without any backup. Makes you seem quite professional.
If there is inflation in most countries on the planet (except China) then obviously Macron didn't cause the inflation.
The linear representation of politic (left - center - right) is limited. There are multiple centers in politic and Macron's centrism is often called far-center or extreme center.
5:33 Is that graph saying youth unemployment was at times at 90% and general around 60%? Surely that can't be right, and that's actually per thousand, or something?
Additional details:
Macron is a representative of what Pierre Serna, a historian of the Revolution and the First Empire, has called "the extreme/radical center". It's not just centrism, it's a certain brand of centrism that pretends to be above all parties and is completely intolerant to any ideology outside of it, calling it extremist and dangerous for democracy/liberty/whatever term the regime describes itself as, which is in itself an ideological position, just one defending the status quo.
Ever since 2017, he came in claiming he would fight populism "on both sides" (as if there's an equivalence between the far right and what he calls the far left), but has instead lead policies that have increased wealth inequalities, made the budget worse due to refusing to raise taxes on the wealthy, has shown himself to be increasingly authoritarian in repressing protests and passing legislation, and has alternated with appealing to center-left voters to present himself as a dam against the far right and normalizing it by taking up some of its talking points and policy proposals, as well as demonizing the left by calling any program even slightly social democratic (like the New Popular Front's or even La France insoumise's) "far left", which isn't the case according to most political scientist, historians and the Conseil d'État, which serves both as one of the two highest courts in France and as an advisory body for the government to write legislative bills (not exactly a den of leftists).
He's basically building the far right (and the National Rally is indeed classified as such by those dag-nasty political scientists, historians and jurists) a golden bridge to power, whether he's conscious of it or not. His goal has always been to divide the left, by absorbing the center-left and demonizing and marginalizing the more "radical" side (even if again, there's nothing very radical about LFI's platform), and set up the match between him and Le Pen, content to let the RN become the biggest party in the meantime. The problem is that he's taken what used to be a common agreement among all republican (small-r) parties, not letting the far right get into power, and turned it into a cynical electoral tool. And people are now sufficiently done with him, and the far-right has taken enough root, that he's actually at risk of losing power.
So after he got trounced in the European elections, he decided to say "f*** it, better have them be in government now until 2027 and let them wear themselves out so my successor can win the presidency then". Which, aside from being reviling political cynicism, is so colossally stupid because we've seen in the past few years that when right-wing populists get into power in liberal democracies, they don't hand back the reins willingly.
Hmmmm I like your explanation!
A Girondin...
He should've stayed centrist or even center-left to preserve his voters. The NR would've risen regardless of his actions.
He couldnt because France economic situation is a disaster. They need to change their economic model completely and reduce worker rights to remain competitive. Only extreme right policies and achieve it with strong police task force to contain stuff like gilet jaune.
MACRON GET OUT
When you abandon the middle class you eventually get your ass kicked out of office.
I love how only the right wing parties are being called extremist and FAR. Why is there only far-right and no far-left. This is absolutely pathetic.
His "Centrism" is like a lot of peoples "Centrism", ends up being much more right-wing than advertised.
Nope he is leftwing not rightwing
@@alexlehrersh9951 Economically, all of his major policies were really far right (reducing taxes on the rich, pushing the age of retirement, privatazing...), and he made them pass even though there was massive strikes through undemocratic processes.
You call this leftwing ?
@@alexlehrersh9951 Since when is neoliberalism left wing?
Ah yes the old "anyone to the right of me is a Nazi". And you wonder why more people are leaning right.
Macron was a Centrist???????
What is centrism anyways and who gets to define what is normal?
its just the ugly uniparty status quo that everyone thinks is common sense but does more harm than goof while preventing real change
its status quo neoliberalism for western republics
And what is “far right”? Oh yeah, a tactic by media to delegitimize them. Can’t be far right when it’s a majority.
in france it is the constitutional council. It is made of smart people who know what they're talking about. And they said Marine party is far right, now the french are dumb enough to pick her and will find out.
We were in an apartment with a gas leak, and Macron struck a match to see more clearly.
"Sacre bleu, its gone blue" is genius.
You could remove the term "centrism" from the caption 😁
Centrists exist primarily to further the interests of business. Business doesn't like being taxed to contribute to the society it relies on, nor does it like the threat of dictatorial government controlling what it does. So it likes policies that steer in-between the extremes, in the centre. Which is often less bad for ordinary people than the extremes can be. But business also likes having all of the money. So centrist governments also have a tendency to alter the system so that more and more money flows out of the hands of the public and into the hands of the business owning elites, which is bad for everyone. To start with this is fine, you get economic stability, businesses create wealth which employs people so most people feel better off, and the enrichment of the rich only happens in small steps that aren't really felt. But the longer it goes on for the more those little enrichments add on top of each other. Until you end up with a society where the public is getting noticeably poorer but most people dont understand why, and the only solutions the centrists have is the same ones they've been doing this whole time. So people start seeing through them. Then people start turning back to the extremes. The right tells people that they are poor because of immigrants or black people or the gays or because the jews or whatever. The left tells people they are poor because the rich have taken all their money, but their solutions to getting that money back aren't always well thought out. But ultimately, centrists can't remain in power forever, because the incentives they exist under are toxic to society. You can only impoverish the public for soo long before theres either a swing towards redistribution to solve the problem or towards dictatorship to keep the public from complaining about being poor
You argument is flawed. You say having less "state" and more private business is always bad. That's ideology. What is bad are oligopolies, lobbyism and little social mobility... as it's bad when governments's wealth redistrubution reduces meritocracy, create nepotism politics or useless public entities to give fake jobs (see south america). If reducing State control is done by being open to small businesses, competition and meritocracy, the common citizen doesn't lose out at all.
If Macron is a centrist, what do y'all call a leftist?
She explained why the left viewed him as unpopular, but not the right. Again the lack of deeply understanding why the right wing and the traditional values are becoming so popular is shamefull.
The cultural war that many countries are facing every single say is never mentioned. Those people live in a bubble.
If social issues are what drives you to such a level of uncomfortablity you become politically active on those grounds alone then centrism has done you well bc your economic position has not been threatened.
I’m afraid people are in for a bitter surprise if you think cultural issues matter more than questions of foreign security and global economy. If war continues in Europe, or worse, if our friends lose it and our opponent gains Europe’s largest country with its resources and tens of millions of people, your culture issues won’t matter. If they gain the fourth largest grain exporting country, Europe’s largest uranium reserves for our nuclear energy, Europe’s largest fertiliser exporting country etc., what do you think this will do to food and energy prices? Also, if you care about migration, you probably should want to stop the country than purposefully created the Syrian refugee crisis, who works hard to create a new refugee crises from Africa and Middle East, and who created the largest refugee crises since the second world war. If people vote for parties due to cultural issues but these parties are friendly with our enemies, receive money from them and degrade our ability to resist them… you may find you will lose your cultural war anyway but will also have to fight a real or hybrid one. One would expect better clarity for Europe’s once pre-eminent superpower. But clearly the labels on toilets are more important.
@@karelkieslich6772 I don't think you understand that people motivated by culture war do not see foreign adversaries like Russia and China as their adversaries. These folks view their own countrymen as enemies. They would much rather live in a world where Russia controls that and prices are high if it means they can call people the f slur.
Because the right wing are npcs driven by propaganda.
A lot of the far right voters don't even care about the culture war or traditional values (far right don't represent them anyway, they are neolibs). They just don't like foreigners. That's it.
0:03 - 0:11 for me this sounds like a Blackmail..
Sacre bleu who would’ve guessed fence riding isn’t a winning strategy
Then how did he win before?
Judge by policy, not by some label like "centrist" or whatever. Macron has been implementing integrationist policies favored by RN, is that fence riding now? When the RN promises to renationalize the highways is that not a left-wing policy? When the NFP promises to cancel the accord with Mercosur and CETA with Canada for the supposed benefit of the peasants is that not a right-wing policy?
Guy got elected twice he literally can’t run again. Also moderation is hardly a bad thing.
@soundscape26 "I'm not Marine Le Pen" that's how he won. But the French didn't necessarily agree with his politics, but had enough trust to block the far right from entering. Hence, they call it the "barrage" - to blocking the far right. But lost the parliamentary elections in 2022 and will this time again in 2024 by that same party.
The thing about fences is that it’s a wall… and the question always become what’s the wall build to stop?
Perfectly summarized. As a French left-leaning voter, back in 2017 when Macron first ran on a "both left and right" type platform, I didn't expect him to be my cup of tea, but I still thought he'd be somewhat palatable. Never would I have imagined him drifting so much to the right. He passed an anti-Muslim (anti-separatism) law. Several laws to give more leeway to the police, including *a law punishing people who film the police that was passed just a few months after George Floyd's death, and a week after a high-profile case of the police being filmed beating down a Black man who was just going back home in Paris* (though that part was later censored by the Supreme Court). He passed a hardline anti-immigration law. He did nothing on climate change, and even rolled back on things that had been done before him. He recently called the left "immigrationist" and criticized its platform for making gender transition too simple. I could go on and on.
His strategy seems to have been, in essence: go always more to the right while also posing as if the political debate was just between him and the far-right and pretending the left didn't exist. He thought he'd keep being the "only safe option" forever. That came biting him in the *ss. But he won't suffer from it. Marginalized people will.
If you stay in the middle of the road, you get run over.
He's been in power for 7 years, getting elected twice in a row. That's far from "getting run over".
As opposed to the two cars driving towards a head on collision?
are you suggesting that there is a lot of traffic between left and right? x)
Not necessarily - some of the world's greatest leaders were centrists and moderates like Ataturk, Pilsudski, FDR, Churchill, De Gaulle, etc
@@fyodordmitrenko622 Ataturk was a consummate nationalist, Churchill was an unapologetic Imperialist, De Gaulle was an authoritarian asshole that proceeded to use the Vichy French and nazi structures to his advantage after the war, Pilsudski was in all honesty mostly weird brand of nationalist (that became an authoritarian asshole later, which was a real shame) and I'd hardly call FDR a centrist considering all the shit he pulled.
No conclusion to this presentation but overall straight enough.
Raising the retirement age was critical. The French are lazy and love socialism too much but it saves them from austerity measures. Or at least buys them more time
The biggest problem is that the French refuse to see that you cant have 100+ holidays, pension at 60, unlimited sick leave (etc etc) without paying for it.
The rost she gives to Sunak at the end have become an icon
I think something needs to be understood about current French politics : Macron's party is not centrist.
You often hear about French politics that there's the far left, the centrists and the far right nowadays.
It needs to be said : This is a failure on the part of the media, the truth is the "far left" has been officially designated as left by a statute of the state council, that at the same time confirmed that the Rassemblement National is indeed far right.
While it is easy to check that the left of today does not in fact support a far left agenda, we also have to look at the way the parties have voted and in that regard it becomes obvious that the "centrist" party of Macron is just as far right as the R.N except on very few subjects mainly immigration.
And for those that wondered about the historic right, they rallied to the far right and vote basically as the RN does.
So in conclusion, there's the left, the right of Macron and the far right.
While politics has shifted to the right for a long time, its transition has been accelerated by the last few years under the rule of Macron, and I believe that might have a lot to do with the way we label those parties ; It is very important to review the politics and history of each parties before labelling them extremes.
And the French media has basically been bought by far right billionaires, there's that too
6:52 I’m pretty sure it’s meant to be “Élysées’”, rather than “Élysée’s”, because the president’s palace is called “Le Palais des Champs Élysées”.
Non, la phrase c’est “les directeurs de communication de l’Élysée” donc avec le s attributif, on dit bien “The Élysée’s heads of communication”.
It is actually quite scary how many people fall for easy sounding "solutions" to complex problems and this is nowhere more evident than France's politics.
France's population is aging and due to its already very high government spending/taxation, even aging by 1 year puts an enormous pressure on public services and working families.
The far-right have this unshakable contradiction between wanting adequate public services and filling skill shortages while being completely opposed to immigration - the very thing which has helped France keep the fertility rate higher than other European countries which are experiencing huge brain drains and skills shortages.
The far-left has a similar contradiction of wanting adequate public services while wanting the retirement age to go back down to 60 which is completely crazy given that France already spends a whopping 16 percent on pensions alone and backtracking on Macron's reforms predicted to cost a further €17 billion. Any sane economist looking at this and France's already unsustainable budget deficit would see that much of Front Populaire's manifesto is just a wishlist of overspending and borrowing pulled up in haste with no consideration for other countries using the euro which are more fiscally responsible (e.g. Germany, Netherlands, Finland). When Mitterrand lowered the retirement age to 60 in the 1980s, France's life expectancy was almost 10 years lower....
Macron has his flaws but at least he tried to address the reality of France's economic situation face-on when other presidents were just kicking the can down the road for a future minister to sort out.
A major issue I see for Macron is just... he's been in power too long. He's run out of momentum, and realistic policies or not, angered too many groups over time to stay. The same can be said of Canada's squishy centrist Liberals under Trudeau, or the rather blindly stumbling British Tories for a right wing example - tenures too long, accrued too many broken promises and scandals.
@@RatchetSly Wait till you hear how long the Social Democrats in Sweden ruled without interruption in the 20th century. You are correct abour broken promises and scandals, but what is the reason that makes you believe a new government would not be the same or worse in that regard? While having very different policies.
The "sensible" groups tend to ignore complaints of people they don't like. Then they get used to silencing and dehumanizing those people names like "extremists" (those names may be accurate but further push them away and into each others arms), making it impossible for them to come back to the center because they disagree on that one thing. Over time more and more people will at one point or another disagree with them and agree with the extremists on some minor point, be called an extremist, and be pushed into liking them more and disliking the centrists less.
I have seen it happen online in the communities I participated in dozens of times live. It's the same every time. Do not call people extremes or dismiss their concerns. Instead work with them to resolve the problem.
Completely agree with you. As a Frenchman, tomorrow I will have the choice between, Pest, Cholera and Covid. Of course, as I'm vaccinated, I will choose Covid...
Mr Bompard representative for France Unbound made it pretty clear that the NFP's objective is to allow people to take an early retirement at 60 years old but that does not mean that he would be entitled to all pension they would have had if they haven't worked for 40 consecutive years
He managed to piss off both ends
Electorate: Wants change
Moderate or Centrist: Promises change whilst only wanted to preserve the status quo
Electorate: Vote for Centrist or Moderate
Centrist: Doesn’t do what they campaigned on, but does exactly what a status quo politician does
Electorate: Is angry, and demands change
Centrist: Vilifies actual politicians with good plans and policies and decides, whilst deciding the far right is OK enough to deal with
Far Right: Promises change whilst wanting to push regressive policies and also backstabs centrist
Centrist: Is upset at betrayal, despite history saying this is exactly what happens when siding with the Far Right, and urges electorate to vote for Moderate or Centrist candidates, whilst not doing anything to help their people, and instead enacting the regressive policies the Far Right want, in order to appeal to the Far Right’s voter base
Electorate: Hate Centrist. Centrist approval ratings in the gutter, and Far Right appeasement doesn’t work
Centrist: Continues vilifying progressive and leftist candidates, who want them to do better and push for change that helps the people
Electorate: Vote for Far Right in next election, even when Left tries to warn Centrist, this is bad
Country: Takes a massive shift to the right and regressive policies are being implemented, started by the centrist, even when this is against what the centrist wanted
Centrist: Surprised Pikachu Face
Fantastic how a British can pronounce French words so nicely like this. Congrats!
Why did it fail? Since when the French were politically moderate in history? Lol
scince the 70's. 50 years of softs clowns. now we have the possibility to see a far left vs far right in the next election! things back to normal at long last.
Try go to eiffel tower and count how many black guy
Starmer is going to do the same mistske if he pivot to fast in preserving the status quo. And Britain would lose
Hopefully Blair and Brown will advise him not to do this. But the pudding is IF Starmer takes notice.
@@evonne_o Lol "pivot" he's the hand puppet of Blair who has been the status quo for over two decades. How naive are you that you genuinely think he will change anything when every leader since Blair has been a Blairite.
His centrism came at the cost of s u ffering for his own people 😂
Overall I think France is just a nearly unreformable mess as a state with too much hard left/hard-right wing ideological fervor. Pretty much every French President in the past 30-40 years has polled miserably after their first 4-5 years in office and become extremely unpopular. There's room for both big government social democracy and neoliberal policy aimed at trade & market liberalization (Scandinavian countries, Germany and the Netherlands all prove as much), but France's democracy seems seem more systemically dysfunctional and incapable of moving past that dysfunction. Rather the dysfunction just evolves and each French President ends their tenure extremely unpopular, not able to achieve most of the ambitious reforms they ran on when they were first elected etc.
@@Godzilla52 lol no france and the eu is ruined by this baseless desire to neuter its wings and remain arrogantly centrist beyond the wishes of the people