The Social World

Tag: Europe

  • The rise of the mayors

    The rise of the mayors

    In Britain, the leading political parties have just held their annual conventions. After a month of national political debates, lost in all the commentary about polling and positioning is a larger and more consequential story about the changing dynamics of power. And it’s simply this: in a world where parties, prime ministers and presidents have long dominated the global stage, the spotlight is increasingly turning to a new group of leaders: mayors. And they are shifting the plot from talk to action.

    Mayors have emerged as entrepreneurial actors on national and even international issues

    In recent years, mayors have emerged as increasingly entrepreneurial actors on national and even international issues. They’re not only collecting trash and fixing roads, but they’re also pioneering new ways to tackle job creation, healthcare, housing construction, climate change and more. They are bringing a spirit of innovation to city halls, as the best US mayors in both major political parties are doing, too.

    This development is only natural, since mayors stand on the front lines of our biggest challenges. And as frustration with national leadership grows around the globe, cities stand out as laboratories of renewal. Mayors are showing how progress happens in practice, by embracing pragmatic problem-solving, rather than ideological combat.

    In London, Mayor Sadiq Khan has capitalized on devolution to reduce air pollution, provide school lunches for children and improve social services. Mayoral combined authorities in Greater Manchester and Liverpool are developing new ways to provide better transportation for residents, more plans for affordable housing and more effective police and fire services. And earlier this year, the British government announced six new regions that will develop mayoral combined authorities, a move that will put 80 percent of the country under devolution.

    Across the EU, local leaders are also raising their ambitions and asserting their power, even without new grants of authority. Helsinki, Finland, has gone without a traffic fatality for more than 365 days thanks to the mayor’s efforts to improve street design and public transport. And the city of Madrid is one step closer to reaching net zero emissions, in no small part because of the mayor’s effort to transition the city’s bus fleet to electric power.

    As mayors rise to meet the moment, it’s critical that they have the skills and capabilities needed to pursue bold ideas – and succeed. When I was first elected mayor of New York in 2001, just weeks after the terrorist attacks of September 11, I had spent 20 years building and running a company. But most mayors arrive in office with little experience running complex organizations. They haven’t spent much time, if any, using data to manage performance; attracting and retaining talent; breaking down silos; improving customer service; solving complex problems by developing and implementing innovative solutions – and many other activities essential to success.

    In the private sector, executive leadership and management training are the rule rather than the exception. But in the public sector, it essentially didn’t exist. And so in 2017 Bloomberg Philanthropies formed a partnership with Harvard University to bridge the gap. Since then, the program has trained mayors in eight of America’s ten biggest cities and more than 380 mayors worldwide, including in Liverpool and Greater Manchester.

    Now, as Europe increasingly turns to its mayors, we are teaming up with the London School of Economics and Political Science and the Hertie School in Berlin to create the first-ever leadership program designed specifically for mayors and top city officials in the UK and across Europe. The inaugural class will include 30 mayors from 17 countries representing a diverse array of cities, from industrial centers and tourism magnets to university hubs and national capitals. The initiative will build their capacity to lead – aligning talent, tools and shared purpose to help them write Europe’s next chapter.

    Over the course of the one-year program, which is backed through a $50 million grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies, mayors and their staffs will take part in training inside and outside the classroom, including one-on-one mentoring and coaching sessions. The focus of the sessions will be on strengthening their capacity to empower their teams, build partnerships with communities and businesses, bring new ideas and creativity to challenging problems, share lessons across city and national boundaries and accelerate progress they are already making.

    As the world increasingly turns to mayors to deliver results, the stakes are much too high to expect them to go it alone. With the very best in leadership and management training, mayors can redefine what is possible for cities – and their countries – to accomplish. As they do, voters will see the virtue of electing problem-solvers over flamethrowers, with the benefits spreading far and wide. In the theater of politics, as in life, Shakespeare’s words hold true: “Action is eloquence.”

    This article was originally published in The Spectator’s October 27, 2025 World edition.

  • Why the French are dreaming of a Donald Trump à la française


    A year ago Donald J Trump was still roundly disliked by the French commentariat. Even the conservative Le Figaro newspaper held its Gallic nose in disdain, running a haughty article headlined “Trump, vulgarity runs rampant.”

    The left still loathe the president of the United States but for the right in France he has become a role model.

    The same Le Figaro now writes approvingly of Trump and admits it got him wrong. “We expected an isolationist Trump, focused solely on American interests,” it declared on Friday. “But in nine months, the president has established himself as a peacemaker in multiple international crises.”

    The French perhaps more than any European nation have never got The Donald. The political class in France are bland, humorless and conventional, as is most of the mainstream media.

    The British populist politician Nigel Farage once said of the American president: “There’s a lot of humor with Trump. It’s quick-witted repartee, which he is a master of. He’s very funny. He’s enormous fun to be with.”

    It’s hard to think of any French politician who could be described as “enormous fun,” certainly not Emmanuel Macron. The only thing enormous about the president of the Republic is his ego. And his list of failures.

    Macron has run France into the ground and reduced the country – and himself – to a laughing stock. The French did not appreciate the sight of Trump mocking Macron in Egypt at the start of this week. But their anger wasn’t directed at the American president, as he wondered with a smirk why Macron was being so “low-key.” For the French, the ridicule of their president is richly deserved.

    The contempt for Macron is arguably most profound within France’s business community. They believed his promise in 2017 to relaunch the country’s economy after five years of shambolic socialism under president Francois Hollande. Macron was hailed as the “Mozart of Finance.”

    Eight years later France finances are out of control and last month two rating agencies downgraded the country’s debt.

    If French conservatives are to break this socialist stranglehold they will need to do more than simply win an election. They must launch a counter-revolution.

    A few weeks ago a book was published in France titled Bosses: the Trump Temptation. Its author, Denis Lafay, interviewed numerous business leaders in France and discovered that they dreamed of a Donald à la française. It was more than his business approach; they also approved of his “strong rejection” of the mainstream media, public spending, international institutions and wokeism. Above all, wrote Lafay, they admired Trump’s personality. “His virility, his taste for combat, his culture of deal-making, his resilience and finally his very authoritarian side, which reassures them.”

    One suspects that France’s business leaders are more desperate than ever for a Donald of their own after the events of this week in parliament. Centrist Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu announced on Tuesday that his coalition government was suspending the pension reform bill of 2023 until after the 2027 presidential election. The main plank of this bill raised the age of retirement from 62 to 64.

    The Socialist Party celebrated. Their 66 MPs had threatened to join a motion of no confidence in the government if the bill wasn’t suspended. Lecornu capitulated to the blackmail. Patrick Martin, the president of Medef, the largest employer federation, said it was “a sad day for France,” and lamented the fact that a minority socialist party was dictating government policy.

    The Socialist Party’s representation in parliament has dwindled from 295 MPs in 2012 to 66 today, but they have been marching through France’s institutions for decades. They control the Supreme Court, the State Council, the National Audit Office, the state-owned broadcaster and much of the judiciary.

    If French conservatives are to break this socialist stranglehold they will need to do more than simply win an election with an absolute majority. They must launch a counter-revolution, as Trump and J.D. Vance have in America, purging the institutions of the left-wing dogma that has taken root since Francois Mitterrand’s presidency of the 1980s.

    Earlier this week a conservative magazine called Frontières ran an editorial headlined “A plea for a French Trump.” It listed his achievements this year, including the deportation of illegal immigrants and the classification of Antifa as terrorists, and contrasted Trump’s administration of seasoned experts with their own “incompetent elites.”

    France, declared the editorial, “deserves a Trump and the government that goes with him to restore its greatness.”

    Making France great again won’t be easy given how low the country has fallen this century. So if there is a French Trump out there, bonne chance.

  • How Islam and the Bible are fueling France’s ‘baptism boom’

    How Islam and the Bible are fueling France’s ‘baptism boom’

    You have probably heard that something extraordinary is happening in the Catholic Church in France.

    The French bishops’ conference announced in April that more than 10,000 adults were due to be baptized in 2025 – a 45 percent increase on the year before.

    It’s not just adult baptisms that are booming. A record 19,000 people, many young, attended this year’s Paris to Chartres pilgrimage. An unprecedented 13,500 high school students took part in the 2025 Lourdes FRAT pilgrimage, a major annual youth event.

    The country is also seeing what French media call a “boom biblique”: a rapid rise in sales of the Bible. Religious bookstores report a 20 percent increase in purchases since 2024.

    It’s easy to state these facts. But it’s harder to discern their cause. Why are young people flocking to the Catholic Church more than 200 years after it was violently ejected from the public square during the French Revolution?

    News reports – both in France and the English-speaking world – have only scratched the surface of the phenomenon. But the most in-depth investigation to date has just been published in France. It’s called Enquête sur ces jeunes qui veulent devenir chrétiens (“Inquiry into Why Young People Want to Become Christians”) and the author is Antoine Pasquier, a journalist at the French Catholic weekly Famille Chrétienne.

    Pasquier explores what young French adults seeking baptism as catechumens say about themselves. He mixes their observations with his own insights as a catechist who saw the wave arrive in his parish and watched as it took on breathtaking proportions.

    The dynamics he uncovers are unexpected.

    For example, through his interviews with catechumens, Pasquier finds that reading the Bible plays a more fundamental role in conversions than the internet and social media. Also, many young seekers arrive at church with an idea of religion shaped not by Christianity but by Islam.

    The book, currently available only in French, offers guidance to Church leaders as they grapple with this unforeseen influx. Pasquier calls for a deep transformation of French Catholicism, from a community resigned to decline to a “catechumenal Church.” He sees signs that this shift may be beginning.

    Pasquier spent 10 years as a reporter for a French regional weekly newspaper before joining Famille Chrétienne in 2013. He has coordinated the Catholic magazine’s investigations into topics such as the abuse crisis. He is married, with four children, and has accompanied young catechumens at his church in the Paris region since 2020.

    In an interview with the Pillar, he discussed the genesis of his book, what surprised him about the catechumens, and the French Church’s lessons for Catholics elsewhere.

    Catholics around the world are fascinated by what’s occurring in France. How would you explain briefly what’s happening to someone living outside of France?

    Since 2020, France has seen a significant influx of catechumens from all ages and social backgrounds. The figures speak for themselves: in 2025, the number of adults seeking baptism is the highest ever recorded since the French bishops’ conference began tracking catechumens in 2002. For the first time, the symbolic threshold of 10,000 adult baptisms has been surpassed.

    Over two years, the growth is remarkable: 5,463 baptisms in 2023, 7,135 in 2024 (+30.6 percent), and 10,384 in 2025 (+45.5 percent). In other words, the number of adult baptisms nearly doubled between 2023 and 2025 (+90 percent).

    Among these 10,384 newly baptized adults, the 18 to 25 age group now represents the largest share, with approximately 4,360 catechumens (42 percent). Adolescent baptisms (ages 11-17) also show strong growth. In 2025, there were 7,404, compared to 1,547 in 2022 (+76 percent). In just three years, the numbers have multiplied nearly fivefold.

    Paradoxically, this phenomenon occurs in an ecclesial context marked by the sexual abuse crisis and a decline in vocations. This completely unexpected influx has caught parishes off guard, forcing them to adapt quickly. Initially taken aback, French Catholics are now seeking the best ways to welcome and support these seekers of God.

    Is your book the first in-depth exploration of why so many young people are becoming Catholics in France?

    Until now, this phenomenon has only been analyzed by media outlets, whether Catholic or secular. Drawing on the statistics published and interpreted annually by the French bishops’ conference, these media have attempted to explain the reasons behind this influx of catechumens. Numerous testimonies have also been published.

    As a journalist for Famille Chrétienne magazine, I began working on this topic three years ago. However, my book is the first comprehensive investigation that seeks to deeply analyze the reasons why these young people are choosing to become Christians.

    I deliberately focused on the 15-25 age group, first, because it is the best represented demographic (45 percent of French catechumens in 2025, or more than 8,000 young people), and second because their pathway differs from that of older adults.

    When did you first become aware of this phenomenon?

    Since 2020, I have been accompanying high school students preparing for baptism in my parish in the Paris region. As a catechist, I’ve seen a growing number of young people in my group who are seeking God and eager to become Christians.

    They often came in groups, frequently with friends. We also began noticing them more often and in greater numbers at Sunday Masses, approaching during Communion with their arms crossed to receive the priest’s blessing.

    This personal observation was echoed by other catechists in different parishes and towns. After doing some research, this time as a journalist, it quickly became clear to me that this phenomenon was nationwide and completely unprecedented.

    Many reports stress the role of the internet in the new wave of conversions. But you’ve discovered that the Bible plays an even more important role. Can you explain why this is the case?

    Gen Z is raised on social media. Influencers on these platforms share increasingly specific and well-crafted content, created by Christian influencers, which provide answers to their existential and spiritual questions.

    But these networks are not the place of their conversion. The conversion happens earlier, in a natural way, I would say. Social media and the internet complement and support their conversion.

    The Bible, on the other hand, plays a role much earlier in their journey. Once they decide to deepen their spiritual search within the Christian faith, the Bible becomes essential for them. Almost all the young people I accompany or have interviewed tell me they bought, opened, and read the Bible before taking any official steps with the Church.

    Alongside the church and Mass, the Bible is a reliable and easily identifiable reference point for them. They think, “I want to be Christian, how do I do it?” And the answer is obvious to them: “I need to read the Bible and go to Mass.” The strong growth in Bible sales, both in France and abroad, reflects this new enthusiasm.

    You note that many young French people who approach the Catholic Church come with an idea of religion that’s shaped by Islam, with its stress on fasting practices, etc. Why is that, and what challenges does it bring?

    It’s primarily the public and overt expression of Islam that challenges them. Some of their Muslim friends openly embrace their faith and religious identity without reservation. This prompts our young people to also make their growing Christian faith visible. This is expressed through wearing a cross necklace, sometimes a chapel veil for young women, or by observing the practices of various liturgical seasons, particularly Lent.

    Lent, with its radicalism, attracts these young people searching for guidance and meaning. They sometimes tend to view this period as a “Christian Ramadan.” Catechists must take care to explain the differences clearly and remind them that Christianity is not primarily a religion of observance but of personal and inner conversion.

    What surprised you most about the young people becoming Catholic?

    Their determination and patience. Some have been on a journey for years, hidden from view, out of fear of being misunderstood by friends or family.

    I think of a young woman who waited nine years between her first time entering a church and her official request for baptism. Another took three years between her first reading of the Gospel, alone in her room, and attending her first Mass with a friend. Their faith is already so strong that they are not afraid to wait this long to receive baptism.

    You call for the French Church to be transformed into a “catechumenal Church.” What would this look like?

    The early Church, the Apostolic Church, was by its very nature a catechumenal Church. When the Apostles and the Virgin Mary received the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, they immediately left the Upper Room to proclaim the Good News of Christ and performed the first baptisms (Acts 2:41).

    In the early communities, Christians — who were therefore neophytes — listened to the teachings of the Apostles. This teaching was centered on proclaiming the kerygma, the core of the Christian faith. These communities were also attentive to each other’s salvation and to the work of the Holy Spirit among them.

    A catechumenal Church is a Church attentive to proclaiming the kerygma, to the salvation of each and every person, and listening to the Holy Spirit. These dispositions will help our Church today to be ever more attractive and open to those who seek God.

    Is there anything that other countries that are also seeing a boom in adult baptisms could learn from the Church in France?

    The Church in France is gradually coming to terms with what is happening. I’m not sure it has many lessons to teach other Churches.

    The first to understand what was happening were the catechists, those closest to the grassroots. They reacted quickly and took steps to address this unexpected wave. If there is a lesson to draw from France, it is this adaptability on the ground.

    The Church must be careful not to remain trapped in old patterns or reflexes. The mindset of “We’ve always done it this way!” is no longer viable. Without losing its essence, the Church must adapt to these new Christians, responding to their questions, expectations, and thirst.

    Pope Leo XIV himself says it well: “The crisis of faith and its transmission, together with the hardships related to ecclesial belonging and practice, invite us to rediscover the passion and courage for a new proclamation of the Gospel. At the same time, various people who seem to be distant from the faith often return to knock on the doors of the Church, or open themselves to a new search for spirituality, which at times does not find adequate language and forms in the usual pastoral offerings.”

    This article was originally published in the Pillar.

  • Sébastien Lecornu’s resignation is a humiliation for France and Macron

    Sébastien Lecornu’s resignation is a humiliation for France and Macron

    In a sensational development, Sébastien Lecornu has resigned as prime minister of France. His departure, after 27 days in office, makes the 39-year-old the shortest reigning premier of the Fifth Republic. Lecornu’s resignation is a humiliation for him, for France and for Emmanuel Macron. The president has now worked his way through seven prime ministers in eight years, a Fifth Republic record he shares with Francois Mitterrand. He, however, presided over France for fourteen years.

    The catalyst for Lecornu’s departure was the new government he unveiled on Sunday evening. He has promised a “break” with Macron’s centrism, but when he announced his government it was anything but. Twelve of the eighteen ministers had been reappointed to their posts, and the response across the political spectrum was one of fury. Within hours the left and the right had promised to bring down the government at the earliest opportunity. They probably didn’t expect that Lecornu would do the job for them.

    Jordan Bardella, the president of Marine Le Pen’s National Rally, has demanded fresh elections. “There can be no return to stability without a return to the polls and without the dissolution of the National Assembly,” he said.

    For Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s far left La France Insoumise, the only route left for Macron is the exit. “The countdown has begun. Macron must go,” declared Mathilde Panot, one of the party’s leading figures.

    Even venerable centrists believe that the game is up for Macron. In an interview on Monday morning, prior to Lecornu’s shock announcement, one of the Republican party’s grandees Xavier Bertrand, castigated Macron for creating the “mess” and then “losing interest” in France.

    It is hard to gainsay that statement. Macron is rarely seen in France these days; if the people want to get a glimpse of their president they must switch on their televisions and watch him pontificating at the United Nations or hugging a minor world leader in some quiet corner of the globe.

    It explains why his approval rating is at 16 percent, and two thirds of the country want him to resign. Increasingly, that does appear the only way out of the quagmire into which Macron has led France.

    A few weeks ago, Bruno Retailleau, the leader of the Republicans and the minister of the interior, declared that “Macronism will end with Emmanuel Macron, simply because Macronism is neither a political movement nor an ideology: it is essentially based on one man.”

    He is right, but unfortunately for France this one man is as intransigent as he is inept. His presidency has destroyed and demoralized the country in so many ways – economically, socially, diplomatically and intellectually. But he refuses to accept responsibility for his actions.

    Xavier Betrand accuses Macron of “losing interest” in France. But did he have any in the first place? Macron is a narcissist; the presidency has always been about him. France is an afterthought. France is in agony, and the pain will only get worse as long as Macron is in power.

  • Why I hate Paris

    Why I hate Paris

    It smells, very badly. And even after decades of complaints, it seems Parisians still consider themselves too chic to pick up after their dogs. Taxis are a nightmare. The traffic makes central London seem like a village in Ireland. Uber drivers park as far away as possible from the designated pick-up point, fail to answer messages or calls, then charge a fortune in waiting time.

    The expense is phenomenal. For three coffees, one mint tea and a croissant that had the texture of a carpet slipper, I was charged more than £30 ($40). And don’t get me started on the coffee: if Paris is the home of café culture, shouldn’t it also be that of good coffee? Wrong! It usually tastes like recycled dishwater, or as if it’s been dredged from the bottom of the Seine. It must be bad if it leaves me hankering after a Nespresso. I asked a Parisian (who I know, and who is less defensive than many of his compatriots) why it is so bad. He replied, “Because Parisians don’t go to cafes to drink coffee, but to socialize, read the paper and watch the world go by.”

    Oh, I see! Because in other capital cities, we go into windowless booths, are served the good stuff, and leave after slugging it back without speaking a word to another soul? This arrogance about the unique, cultured “Parisian experience” drives me mad. Another example of this refusal to take criticism can be found in many travel guides: “When people hate Paris, it’s usually that they want to travel, but they want everything to be just like home at the same time,” goes the excuse.

    When visitors to London say they hate the city, most Londoners will respond with a sympathetic “I don’t blame you” or “I can see why.” I am a huge fan of my city, but this doesn’t blind me to its faults.

    This is more than can be said of Parisians. Mention the rude waiters and bartenders, and you will be told in no uncertain terms that this is “just their style.” Really? When I ask for something very simple, in straightforwardly accurate French – say, a glass of red wine – why do I have to be met with a blank look before the waiter switches to English in an unfriendly and dismissive manner, leaving me feeling embarrassed and reluctant to speak French again?

    Despite being recommended up the wazoo in food guides, and by locals, most of the restaurants are mediocre or bad. They often give the impression that you, the customer, are bothersome, and should be very grateful to have a table, despite the ridiculous prices. If you don’t believe me, try asking for a second napkin – then resist the temptation, following the response from the waiter, to get up, cross the room and find one yourself.

    God knows, Italians can be rude, too. But it seems they do it for their own amusement, and it doesn’t feel malevolent at all. However, even the French hate Parisians – possibly because of how dangerous and scary some of the central areas have become in the past decade or so. As I stepped off the train last week, I felt surrounded by groups and pairs of men, all hanging around looking for tourists, and – given that they weren’t offering cab rides or accommodation – I can only assume they were there for the pickpocketing.

    The streets stink of urine, and the place is absolutely filthy, including the Métro – way worse than anything you’ve seen on the Underground in London, which is an achievement in and of itself. Locals must drop rubbish, because I have never seen as much trash on the pavement, despite the proliferation of rubbish bins in the city. I asked about this at my hotel, only to be told petulantly: “London has trash too!”

    Feted in the movies and in literature, Paris has a reputation for being the most romantic city on the planet. I think this only adds to the bitter disappointment many experience when they visit. It’s high time that reputation, built on sand, was finally demolished.

    Yes, there are some impressive sights, such as Montmartre and the panoramic views from the Sacré-Cœur – but up close many of those tall, impressive-at-a-distance buildings are grubby, held up by decaying cement and stone. Mildew oozes from cracks, there’s rust on the banisters and used condoms everywhere, from all the prostitution sex that happens in grubby alleyways across the city. In short, there are far nicer cities in Europe, where you will very likely get a far better cup of coffee.

  • Trump admonishes the United Nations

    Trump admonishes the United Nations

    Was there a plot against President Trump at the United Nations? Upon his arrival, the escalator apparently stopped working. Next his teleprompter failed. Small wonder that Trump was in less than a concessive mood as he delivered his speech denouncing the UN itself as a colossal failure. The result was the kind of talk he would give to a political rally – except it was to an unreceptive, if not hostile, audience.

    Throughout, Trump made it clear that his estimation of his abilities is very different from his view of the UN. “I’m really good at this stuff,” he declared. “I’ve been right about everything.” As for everyone else: “Your countries are going to hell.”

    Presumably his dire verdict does not apply to close allies such as Javier Milei, the president of Argentina, who is depleting the country’s financial reserves to prop up the peso. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has vowed to lend Argentina up to $30 billion, presumably in the hopes of shoring up Milei’s political fortunes on the eve of midterm legislative elections on October 26. Milei, like Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, is a favored son.

    When it came to Europe, Trump had nothing but scorn. “We have an ocean in between. Europe has to step it up. They’re buying oil and gas from Russia while they’re fighting Russia.” True enough. But Europe has been stepping it up. The suspicion in Europe that Trump will concoct excuse after excuse to avoid fracturing his bromance with Russian president Vladimir Putin is not an unjustified one.

    After vowing to reassess the relationship should Putin remain refractory after the Alaska summit meeting in mid-August, Trump has done nothing to up the pressure on Russia. Instead, he has watched passively as Moscow bombards Ukraine and sends drones and fighter jets into NATO’s eastern flank. When all the world is a hopeless jumble, Trump wants to pretend that somewhere over the rainbow the dreams that you dare to dream really do come true.

    Indeed, as he hectored the assembled heads of state, bellowing about his own greatness, Trump’s aim wasn’t to dwell on conflict but to portray himself as the true peacemaker. He, not the UN, is creating a new pacific era – a golden age, if you will. According to Trump, “I ended seven wars and in all cases they were raging with countless of thousands of people being killed.” The claim that he, and he alone, terminated the conflict between Pakistan and India is likely to further sour relations with President Narendra Modi, whom Trump has steadily driven into the arms of a receptive China.

    By the end of his speech, Trump struck a friendlier tone. His teleprompter, after all, had begun to function again. “Let us all work together to build a bright, beautiful planet,” Trump said, “a planet that we all share, a planet of peace in a world that is richer, better, and more beautiful than ever before. That can happen. It will happen.”

    Hmm. For all the enmity his earlier rebarbative remarks may have created, they at least had the virtue of reflecting Trump’s true convictions. As always, Trump is least persuasive, or least believable, when he adopts the saccharine language of more conventional politicians. The more credible Trump at the UN was the one who warned drug cartels that he would “blow you out of existence.” Yeah, baby!

  • Trump’s state visit to the UK could not be going better

    Trump’s state visit to the UK could not be going better

    So, the Donald was on his best behavior after all. There had been rumors flying around that President Trump would use his speech at the formal banquet that has been thrown in his honor by King Charles to make some pointed reference to free speech and its perceived absence thereof in Britain today. In the event, there was nothing but a series of emollient statements of praise for his hosts, their family and the country he was visiting, as well as, of course, himself.

    This threw up some incongruities – who would ever have imagined hearing Trump allude to Locke and Orwell? But his sentiments were warm (only partially reduced by his less-than-fluent delivery, reading at times haltingly off what looked like a giant prompt book). As such, they would have gone down well with those in St George’s Hall in Windsor Castle and far beyond.

    In truth, Trump’s state banquet was never expected to be a controversial or difficult event. Whether the King had wanted to host this second, unprecedented state visit for the American president or not, he was never going to make any public protestation, and so the speech of welcome that he gave his guest was typically warm and eloquent. He talked of the “enduring bond” between the two countries, in language soon echoed by Trump, and made a good joke, saying, in an allusion to George III and the War of Independence: “It is remarkable to think just how far we have come. My five times great-grandfather did not spare his words when he spoke of the revolutionary leaders.”

    Still, both men had their own agendas in mind, too, and they were expressed in polite yet pointed ways. The King talked with vigor of the enduring special relationship, but also – in lines presumably suggested by the government – he observed that “Today, as tyranny once again threatens Europe, we and our allies stand together in support of Ukraine, to deter aggression and secure peace.” Was there the slightest hint of irony when he praised Trump – a man obviously angling for the Nobel Peace Prize – and his “personal commitment to finding solutions to some of the world’s most intractable conflicts”? There almost certainly was.

    And even in his peroration, when Charles spoke of how “in renewing our bond tonight, we do so with unshakeable trust in our friendship and in our shared commitment to independence and liberty”, there was the hint of a suggestion that this commitment might present itself in rather different ways. Talk of Trump’s attempts to protect the environment may have been more wishful thinking on Charles’s part than demonstrable fact.

    The President, meanwhile, has had a splendidly indulgent day of watching military displays in his honor, all of which have taken place out of public view in the grounds of Windsor Castle, so as to avoid the embarrassment of any protests marring his fun. Therefore, when he delivered his remarks, they came from a place of apparent contentment – hence the sincerity of his warm words about the royals. Nevertheless, he was still unable to resist a spot of self-praise as he announced that America has gone from being “a very sick country” to the “hottest anywhere in the world”. The King, to his immense credit, kept his best poker face throughout.

    Still, everyone involved in organizing this state visit will, rightly, congratulate themselves on how well the day went. Even the gray, overcast weather did not turn into the downpour that occasionally threatened to materialize, and the pageantry and glitz on display (at a rumored cost of £15 million for the entire event) show that, when Britain attempts to put on a performance like this, it usually succeeds.

    The political aspects of Trump’s visit come today, and they will be harder-won than this largely decorative display of soft power. But this coming together of two very different men, with very different values, over watercress panna cotta and ballotine of Norfolk chicken could hardly have gone better, either for them or their respective countries. And Charles will also know that the occasion will not – cannot – occur again, either, which may have made the whole thing easier to bear with suitably well-bred equanimity.

  • The AfD’s mission to seduce West Germany is starting to pay off

    The AfD’s mission to seduce West Germany is starting to pay off

    The Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party continued its westward march in popularity across Germany yesterday, securing third place in the local elections in the western state of North Rhine-Westphalia. Preliminary results show that, alongside the outcomes of mayoralty and district administrator elections which took place in the state, the far-right party won 14.5 percent of the vote across the 396 municipalities which went to the polls. The liberal SPD party came in second with 22.1 percent, while the CDU – the governing party in Berlin – secured a third of the vote, with 33.3 percent.

    The German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, will be breathing a small sigh of relief at the results this morning. Although these were local elections, yesterday’s vote has been treated as a litmus test for the first four months of his chancellorship, and it seems he has just about emerged unscathed. But it would be a mistake for the CDU leader to think he is now off the hook until next year’s more significant round of state elections.

    While Merz’s Christian Democrats managed to cling on to the top spot in North Rhine-Westphalia, the party did marginally worse than at the last set of local elections in 2020, losing 1 percent of support. This is, however, the party’s worst set of local election results in the nearly 80 years since North Rhine-Westphalia was founded. More concerningly for the Chancellor, the AfD managed to nearly triple its vote share from 5.1 percent five years ago. These results are just the latest sign that, slowly but surely, it’s not just the former East Germany – traditionally the AfD’s homeland – that is falling for the siren song of the far right.

    While yesterday’s elections concerned the lowest administrative rung on the ladder of the German state, they were far from insignificant. North Rhine-Westphalia is Germany’s most populous state – about a quarter of the country’s population lives there, with over 13 million eligible to vote (including 16- and 17-year-olds). Voter turnout has been projected at nearly 57 percent – a 30-year high. A flurry of visits to the state in recent weeks by the country’s most prominent politicians, including SPD chairman Lars Klingbeil, prominent Green politician Ricarda Lang and even Merz himself, demonstrated just how important yesterday’s vote has been considered in Berlin.

    For Merz’s coalition partners, the SPD, last night was bleak. Winning just a projected 22.1 percent of the vote, the liberals are on track for their worst results in North Rhine-Westphalia’s history. Damningly, the party actually did better than polling done at the end of last month predicted by over four percentage points. That municipal elections in Germany often serve as a protest vote against the governing parties in Berlin is of little comfort to the SPD. Yesterday’s dire results led one of the party’s MPs, Ralf Stegner, to describe the SPD’s situation as “extremely dangerous – perhaps even life-threatening.”

    This set of elections was fought primarily on issues over which Merz and his colleagues in the Bundestag have little direct responsibility. Topics such as problems with traffic and the condition of infrastructure such as local roads and bridges cropped up repeatedly. Nevertheless, some themes – such as concerns over the increase in the cost of living and housing pressures in the state – tapped into a broader national discourse. 

    Predictably, the AfD took advantage of voter concerns surrounding the “integration of foreigners” into the local community as a proxy to once again form their campaign around the questions of migration. Poignantly, the town of Solingen, where three people were stabbed to death and a further eight injured at a festival by a Syrian refugee last summer, sits within the state. Tesla billionaire Elon Musk once again threw his support behind the far-right party, as he did in February’s federal election, tweeting at the end of August that “either Germany votes AfD or it is the end of Germany.”

    The local election campaign period was also not without its oddities. An unusual cluster of deaths of AfD candidates in the state in the run-up to the vote – seven in total – led to conspiracy theories, pushed by the party itself, that something nefarious may have taken place. No evidence has so far emerged, though, to suggest foul play in their deaths. 

    Ahead of the vote, Merz diplomatically promised to “draw conclusions” from the results and, more specifically, to use the lessons his party learns to take the fight to the AfD in the coming months and years. Among the many problems looming over Merz and his SPD coalition partners is a clear issue of demographics: just under 70 percent of over 60s voted for the CDU and the liberals, compared to 43 percent of those under 25. 

    If the two parties want to secure their political survival over the coming years, they will have to significantly broaden their offerings to younger voters. This won’t be easy: interestingly, it wasn’t only the AfD that scooped up a significant number of youth votes (11 percent): the left-wing Die Linke party secured support from 18 percent of 16-25 year olds. Berlin’s establishment parties are facing a political assault on both sides.

    As a microcosm of German politics, last night’s vote in North Rhein-Westphalia shows just how fractured the country is becoming. The results aren’t quite set in stone yet: with a higher than expected number of candidates failing to reach the 50 percent thresholds to win their seats, at least 147 municipalities and districts will hold runoff elections in two weeks’ time, which may yet shift the final vote shares.

    True to form, Merz has seemingly squeaked through his first electoral test as chancellor. His stuttering efforts to reset the narrative from Berlin following three largely disastrous years under his predecessor Olaf Scholz’s traffic-light coalition have yet to bear fruit – if they ever will. It is only then that the true test will come for Merz on one question alone: will he have become the chancellor who gave away power to the AfD?

  • Macron must go

    This evening Emmanuel Macron will almost certainly be searching for his fifth prime minister since January last year. François Bayrou’s decision to call a vote of confidence in his government looks like a calamitous misjudgment, one that will plunge France into another period of grave instability. Comparisons are being drawn with the tumult of the Fourth Republic when, between 1946 and 1958, France went through more than 20 governments.

    Bayrou’s coalition government has limped along this year, achieving little other than creating more disenchantment and contempt among the long-suffering electorate. The French are fed up with their political class.

    Above all, they’re sick to the back teeth of their president. It was Emmanuel Macron’s decision to call a snap election in June 2024 that kickstarted the chaos. And to think he did it for “clarification.”

    An opinion poll last week reported that Macron’s approval rating has hit a record low: just 15 percent of the country think he is doing a good job. Who are these 15 percenters? How can any voter cast an eye over their crumbling country and conclude that France is in a better state economically and socially than it was in 2017?

    Across the political spectrum calls are growing for Macron to resign. From Marine Le Pen on the right to Jean-Luc Mélenchon on the left, and including veteran centrists such as Jean-François Copé, a minister in the government of Jacques Chirac. They believe the only way France can begin to rebuild is with a new president.  So do the majority of the people; a weekend opinion poll reported that 58 percent believe Macron should resign in the event Bayrou loses his vote.

    Were Macron a man of his word he would step down. In an exchange in 2019 with a group of intellectuals, he criticised previous presidents who stayed in their posts despite losing the confidence of voters in legislative elections. 

    The French are fed up with their political class

    “The president of the Republic should not be able to stay (in office) if he had a real disavowal in terms of a majority,” said Macron.

    The president’s parliamentary majority was slashed in the 2022 election when his party lost 105 seats. In last year’s snap election, they hemorrhaged a further 95.

    The president still struts around the international stage, exchanging hugs and handshakes with other equally inept European leaders. But outside Western Europe no one takes Macron seriously. Not Trump, not Xi, not Putin, not even Tunisia.

    Last week a Tunisian with a history of drug abuse and violence rampaged through Marseille, stabbing several people with a knife as he screamed “Allahu Akbar.” Police shot him dead. The Tunisian government is outraged, calling it “an unjustified killing” and demanding an investigation into the actions of the policemen.

    Authoritarian regimes issue such provocative statements because they know Macron won’t respond. Tunisia, like Algeria – which in the last 12 months have thrown a French journalist and a Franco-Algerian writer in jail – have no respect for the president of the Republic.

    With every day that Macron stays in office, France’s international standing drops another notch. But he insists that he won’t resign.

    In that case, what are the alternatives to France’s political impasse, assuming Bayrou does lose his vote of confidence this evening? Macron could dissolve parliament and call fresh elections, which is what Marine Le Pen wants. But then she would, knowing that the opinion polls put her National Rally party way in front of its rivals.

    Last week, former president Nicolas Sarkozy said that legislative elections were the “only solution.” He also legitimatized Le Pen, declaring that the “National Rally is a party that has the right to stand in elections… in my view, they belong to the Republican spectrum.”

    It’s going to be a week of extreme turbulence in France

    Last month Macron declared that fresh elections aren’t the answer. His preference is to cobble together a third coalition government. Having tried a center-right Premier (Michel Barnier) and a centrist in Bayrou, he’s said to be considering a prime minister from the left.

    The name on commentators lips is Olivier Faure, the leader of the Socialist Party. He and Macron know each other well, to the point of using the informal “tu” when addressing each other.

    You might consider it odd that Macron would turn to a Socialist. This is the party whose representation in parliament has nosedived from 331 seats in 2012 to 66 last year. Their presidential candidate in the 2022 election, Anne Hidalgo, polled 616,478 votes (1.7 percent), 200,000 fewer than the Communist candidate.

    Then again perhaps it isn’t surprising. Macron may have sold himself to the public as a centrist when he launched his En Marche! party a decade ago, but he is at heart a Socialist. He admitted it to a summit of business leaders in 2014, when as the Economy Minister in Francois Hollande’s government, he told his audience: “I am a Socialist… I stand by that.”

    In effect, France has been governed by a Socialist since 2012. Between them Hollande and Macron have led the Republic to rack and ruin. Now there is the prospect of a Socialist prime minister.

    Among the measures Faure has announced in the event he becomes PM are a reduction of the retirement age from 64 to 62 and the creation of a 2 percent tax on assets worth more than €100 million ($117 million).

    It’s going to be a week of extreme turbulence in France. There is the vote today in parliament and then on Wednesday the people will take to the streets in a protest movement called “Block Everything.”

    Do they really need to bother? France is already blocked, thanks to Emmanuel Macron.

  • Poland’s Nawrocki heralds a more mature populism

    Yesterday, September 3, President Trump welcomed Karol Nawrocki, the newly inaugurated president of Poland to the White House. It was a stirring occasion, replete with a surprise military fly-over of F-16 and F-35 fighter jets flying in “missing man” formation to honor  Major Maciej “Slab” Krakowian, the Polish pilot who died in a crash in Radom, Poland, last Thursday. 

    Nawrocki, who narrowly won the presidency in June, is often described as “the Polish Trump.” It’s an accurate epithet. Nawrocki is as much a “Poland First” president as Trump is an “America First” president. The 42-year-old historian (Nawrocki holds a PhD in history) supports a list of policy initiatives that could have come right out of the MAGA playbook. In his inaugural address on August 6, he touched on several of these themes. Unlike his brethren in the EU, Nawrocki, a staunch Roman Catholic, emphasized Poland’s abiding “attachment to Christian values and identity.” Among those values, he noted, were “love and mercy towards other people,” including, he said with a perhaps a touch of irony, those who had vilified and lied about him during his campaign. 

    On more overtly political matters, Nawrocki affirmed that at the center of his “Plan 21” platform were two negative imperatives: “no” to illegal migration “no” to adopting the euro. Poland would maintain its own currency, and thus its independence from the encroachments of the EU not only on matters of illegal immigration but also on such subjects as energy (Nawrocki is pro-nuclear energy) and the florid sexual exoticism of LGBTQ+ and transsexual activists.  

    During his meeting with Trump in the Oval Office, Nawrocki stressed his commitment to bolster Poland’s contribution to NATO. It already stands at 4.7 percent of GDP, he noted, one of the highest in the EU, and his goal is 5 percent. 

    Trump endorsed Nawrocki last spring and it was clear that the two men have a lot in common. Both are pro-growth, pro-law and order (Nawrocki is an independent but is supported by the conservative Law and Justice party), and pro-national sovereignty. And just as Donald Trump has been wildly castigated (and indicted) by agents of the globalist, deep-state establishment, so Nawrocki has been the object of a campaign of vilification by the usual suspects. The Polish American, anti-Trump writer Anne Applebaum, for example, has dismissed Nawrocki as an “authoritarian populist candidate” and advocate of “blood-and-soil nationalism.” The side-long allusion to the diminutive Austrian house painter with the funny mustache was not adventitious.  

    In fact, Karol Nawrocki is one of a new breed of politically mature populist leaders in Europe, among whose number I would include Italy’s Giorgia Meloni and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán. These are leaders who have rejected the malicious hot-house utopianism of open borders and fantasy politics in which a nurturing past is exchanged for a congeries of militantly superficial and enervating liberal clichés. If leaders like Karol Nawrocki represent the future of Europe, Europe’s future will be bright. Donald Trump saw that instantly, which is why the two men exhibited such obvious rapport and camaraderie in the Oval Office. I predict that meeting marked the beginning of a beautiful friendship.