Posted on 05/28/2019 6:54:17 AM PDT by dangus
No, the Greens did not surge in popularity. There are two "Green" coalitions, the European United Left-Nordic Green Alliance (EUL) and the Green-European Free Alliance (EFA). The EUL is the successor to communist parties; the EFA includes several ethnic minority and regional interests and is considered Center-Left. The EFA gained 17 seats, and the EUL lost 13... so the Greens gained 4 seats in a legislature of 751 seats. So the big story isn't the minor net gain, but the net movement of Green from hard Left to center-left.
The big story on the Left is the further collapse of the Socialists. Initially, the 2014 elections were deemed to have happened at a snapshot in time that was most unfortunate for the Left; certainly, the thought went, they would rebound. They did not. They lost a further 41 seats. They are reduced to only 19% of the European parliament. Together with the other leftist parties, they still get only 34%.
The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats (ALDE) represent the centrists, although it is more accurate to say they represent certain left-wing interests and certain right-wing interests. They are unified in supporting the European Union and fitting poorly into either the mainstream Left or mainstream Right parties. Most national parties are promote the free markets (in Europe, this is considered economic liberalism), but many are socially liberal. ALDE gained 41 seats, but more than half of this number comes from the addition of French President Macron's MODEM party, which joined the ALDE with 23 seats. Macron has governed very much like a traditional, pro-European Republican in France.
Conservative, Euroskeptic parties include the European Conservative and Reformists (ECR), Europe of Nations and Freedom and Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (EFDD). Together, they hold 177 seats, a net gain of 18. ECR lost 17 seats, almost all in the U.K., where voters heavily rejected the Conservative Party as insincerely anti-Europe. These seats went mostly to the EFDD, which gained 13. The ENF gained 22 seats, driven by the incredible success of Italy's League. Once called the Northern League, the League originally sought the secession of the Po Valley from Italy; now it dominates Italian politics.
Thirty-Eight seats are held by independents, and new or non-aligned parties. Many of these are very right-wing and most are Euro-skeptic.
Despite their huge gains, Euroskeptic parties still are decidedly in the minority, with independents and non-aligned parties needed to push them past the 1/4 mark.
The parliament's most remarkable shift is the shift away from the Left. The right continues to make up about half of the parliament, but the centrist party grew at huge expense to the left, especially the hard left, while that same centrist party became more typical of the formerly pro-European conservative parties.
I forgot to mention the “mainstream” conservatives, which lost 37 seats, almost all to the populist-right/Euroskeptic parties. This did NOT include the UK conservatives who aligned with the ECR, and comprised almost all (15 of 17) losses to the EFDD
Damn Euro politics is worse than any soap opera ever. I don’t understand a damn bit of it. Not that ours is much better.
Really? That's not what I have read. Isn't he the guy who is trying to raise the cost of gas to astronomic levels to satisfy the "Paris accord" crowd?
I don’t understand Euro politics either other than there’s no direct correlation between conservatives here and over there.
It’s like watching a telenovela
I was in France recently on business. I had a couple of political discussions with colleagues that were local. A couple Frenchmen said there was concern about the “right” gaining seats in the EU. They said it stems from the idea that the NAZI party was right wing. Apparently people are at least somewhat afraid of what would happen if conservatives were in the majority.
I explained the circular relationship regarding the left Vs right. By today’s standards in political partisanship, the NAZI party would be left. I was relieved that they actually agreed with that concept. But also admitted that most of their countrymen/women were dolts and didn’t know any better. Sounds familiar.
I think that initially, the French ‘right’ was a pro monarchy and pro-Catholic element. They were, if I understand it correctly, a sort of last gasp of traditional French thinking. They never consolidated their social or political position and never gained ascendancy.
Neither of those elements were, or ever became, strong in France... the power vacuum was filled by French pro Nazi types. Whatever Conservatism’s final posture was in France, it was appropriated by Fascists. So the French (and lots of others, worldwide) made, and continue to mistakenly make, a direct association between the traditional right in France and the Fascists who replaced and subverted that group.
The association, no matter how loose, has kept French Conservatism in a very bad light and always lends Socialism/Communism an attraction for young people.... because they think they are being ultra modern. In fact they were and are working with Socialists/Communists in the destruction of France and the French national character.
They are past the point of no return.
Fed up with May, Conservatives were a big reason for the rise of the Brexit Party. Not unlike the rise of what could be called the MAGA Party in the US in 2016. Trump had to take over the GOP for fundraising reasons because 3rd parties and coalitions can’t win here.
Yes. He supported raising the cost of gas twelve cents per gallon (.03 Euros per liter), in order to fulfill a treaty supported by the Republicans of France. Then suspended the hike. At the same time, he has also pushed through massive deregulation the likes of which the Republicans never dared propose. He also seeks to reduce corporate taxes from 33% to 25%, to remove investment income from the wealth tax, cut civil servants by 120,000 and exempt 18 million households from residence taxes.
Is that like the Judean People's Front (JPF) or the People's Front of Judea (PFJ)? Or the Judean Popular People's Front (JPPF)...
SPLITTERS!
Ditto here. I can’t keep up with all the acronyms. They need to wear team jerseys and give us a program. :-)
Origin of political terms left and right...
http://factmyth.com/the-origin-of-the-political-terms-left-and-right/
“”Whatever Conservatism’s final posture was in France, it was appropriated by Fascists.”
I see your point about how the perception of, and control over, the political right in France has shifted. More broadly, the political “right” and “left” have a different character in different countries, and at different times. In the USA, for example, the “right” has no monarchist affections.
But I would propose that French Conservatism has no “final” posture. Indeed, the FN (for example) seems to me to have evolved decisively away from the early fascism and anti-semitism of Jean Marie Le Pen, to the more nationalistic isolationism of Marine Le Pen, and perhaps may be headed to a more recognizable affinity to American conservatism in the future under Marion Maréchal.
The ebb and flow and evolution never ends.
Thanks for that great analysis.
Doing the work the media just won’t do.
Actually, the French fascists were almost universally Socialist. And then almost all of the Vichy government joined the Socialists after WWII.
You’re probably thinking of the German “right.” The Christian Democrats/Catholic Social Union were tricked into voting for the act which gave emergency powers to Hitler, in a scene straight out of The Revenge of the Sith. They understood that they had huge concessions from the National Socialists, but they didn’t read the bill before they voted on it. The concessions had been unilaterally stripped.
After WWII, however, it was the Free Democratic Party which ended up attracting the most Nazis. The FDP is like Northeastern Republicans: socially liberal, environmentalist, economic policies which favor the wealthy inaccurately marketed as being “fiscally conservative.”
Thanks for the analysis.
“Euro politics” is a mixture of two levels or more of politics
1. the most important - at the individual country-levels -> like France, Poland, etc.
2. secondary importance - the individual “nation” or administrative levels —> for instance in Germany it is a Federal structure, with the Landen (states) having the ability to conclude treaties with foreign countries in matters within their own sphere of competence and with the consent of the Federal Government (Article 32 of the Basic Law). Typical treaties relate to cultural relationships and economic affairs.
3. tertiary importance the European parliament
Why is the EU parliament of tertiary importance? Because the way the EU is set up - it’s not a country, but a confederation (a looser federation) where the real power is with the executive - the leaders of the 28 countries that are part of the federation (the Executive).
For an idea of how “Europe” will react to something - well, you can’t get that idea, except for trade purposes.
For trade purposes you can look at Donald Tusks’ statements.
For stuff like say a US war with Iran, you need to see what individual countries think.
In terms of politics - well it varies throughout the 28 countries
Both were successful and neither recovered.
French politics tried to resuscitate the church and recover its social and political significance. In the end... the Fascists delivered the coup de gras.
Lots of ‘water under the bridge’ since then, but the effect is the same... there's no hope for Conservatism of any description in France.
Also, the sad fact is- ‘where ever Paris goes, so goes the rest of the country’. This is an inescapable fact and works to the benefit of all anti - church politics and anti-Conservative groups.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.