Tag: Macron

  • Macron has declared war on free speech

    Macron has declared war on free speech

    Emmanuel Macron says Europeans should stop relying on social media for their news and turn back to traditional public media. Speaking in Paris on Wednesday, he said people were “completely wrong” to use social networks for information and should instead depend on journalists and established outlets. Social platforms, he argued, are driven by a ‘process of maximum excitement” designed to “maximize advertising revenue,” a system he said is “destroying the foundations of democratic debate.”

    He accused X of being “dominated by far-right content” and added that the platform was no longer neutral because its owner had “decided to take part in the democratic struggle and in the international reactionary movement.” TikTok, he warned, was no less dangerous. Macron called for “a much stronger agenda of protection and regulation in Europe” to rein in what he views as the excesses of social networks.

    Macron is urging Europe to “take back control of our democratic and informational life.” This is not the first time that he has spoken in such terms. France and its allies, he warned, have been “naïve” in allowing their public debate to be shaped by foreign-owned platforms and algorithms that no longer respect neutrality. To counter what he calls “a crisis of information,” he wants a new “European agenda of protection and regulation.” It is, in effect, a plan to bring the digital sphere under far stricter political control.

    Macron’s comments are an attack on how an entire generation gets its news. Over 40 percent of people under 30 and nearly half of 18- to 30-year-olds now rely on social media for news. He appears to believe they should return to the days of reading and watching state-controlled media. The suggestion is astonishing. It’s frightening to even have to write this but democracy depends on access to competing points of view, not on state-managed television and subsidized newspapers. Macron cannot seriously believe that it would be good for democracy if Europeans were driven back to getting their news from government-aligned networks.

    Macron also blamed foreign interference, accusing Russia of being “the biggest buyer of fake accounts’ aiming to destabilize European democracies. “We’re facing interference on steroids,” he said. Macron has previously cited alleged manipulation of online content during recent elections in Eastern Europe, which he called “terrifying.” Yet observers found little evidence of large-scale manipulation in those cases. What really unsettled Paris and Brussels was often the result of those elections and the rejection of EU-backed candidates. His warnings about fake accounts look less like a defense of democracy than an argument for tightening state control over speech.

    The logical consequence of what Macron is proposing is that to abolish “fake accounts” you must abolish anonymity itself. If Macron is serious about ending fake accounts, and he keeps repeating that he is, the only way to do that is through digital identity. His plan leads inevitably to a system where anyone who wants to post or comment online must first prove who they are.

    The architecture for full control of social networks in the Europe already exists. The EU’s eIDAS regulation requires every member state to issue digital identities. There is France Identité, Germany has eID, Italy its SPID. Originally designed for banking, healthcare and tax, these IDs could easily be integrated into online services. Macron’s vision would plug them directly into the Digital Services Act. The result would be an internet where every post is traceable to a verified name. It’s a short step from fighting “fake accounts” to outlawing anonymous speech altogether.

    For years, Macron has argued that the internet must be brought to heel. When he cannot legislate at home, he does it through Brussels. The EU’s Digital Services Act already gives regulators the power to police what they call “systemic risks” online, a term broad enough to cover disinformation, hate speech, or anything judged destabilizing to democracy. Under the Act, platforms can be fined up to 6 per cent of global turnover, a threat that forces them to police themselves long before Brussels intervenes. The result is over-compliance and the quiet erosion of free speech. Add the eIDAS digital-identity framework, and Macron suddenly has the tools to pursue his long-standing ambition of ending online anonymity.

    In France itself, Macron is running out of power. His government has no stable majority, his authority in parliament has evaporated, and his personal ratings have collapsed. A poll in Le Figaro magazine this week puts his confidence level at just 11 per cent, among the lowest scores ever for a president of the Fifth Republic. On the streets he’s booed. Online he’s mocked daily. But in Brussels, the machinery of regulation still answers to him. The Digital Services Act and eIDAS framework move forward regardless of French politics, enforced by bureaucrats rather than parliament. Macron may be paralyzed in Paris, but in Europe he can still act like a statesman. The danger is that he could still in the time that he has left in office shape the rules that define what Europeans can and cannot say.

    Macron insists he’s defending democracy from manipulation and hate. But that’s the excuse. His vision is of a Europe where free speech is tolerated only when it is traceable, and where platforms pre-emptively silence anything that might draw a regulator’s glare. He calls it a “resurgence of democracy.” It’s nothing of the kind. It’s the bureaucratization of thought, and the beginning of a continent where debate survives only on license. If Macron has his way, Europe’s public square will not just be regulated, it will be licensed.

  • 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.

  • Macron’s story has become a Shakespearean tragedy

    Macron’s story has become a Shakespearean tragedy

    This week has been a tale of two presidents. On the one hand there is Donald Trump, who has masterminded a peace deal between Israel and Hamas which, the world hopes, will end the conflict in Gaza.

    Even Trump’s long-standing detractors acknowledge his role in bringing the warring parties to the negotiating table. “Trump’s unique style and crucial relationships with Israel and the Arab world appear to have contributed to this breakthrough,” explained the BBC.

    It hasn’t been such a good week for Emmanuel Macron. On the contrary it’s been the most humiliating few days of his eight and a half years in office. On Monday his Prime Minister, Sébastien Lecornu, tendered his resignation after 27 days in office. It was the shortest premiership in the 67 years of the Fifth Republic. Lecornu resigned 12 hours after unveiling a new coalition government that was so unpopular he felt compelled to throw in the towel.

    Then late on Friday evening Lecornu was reappointed prime minister. He explained that he had accepted “the mission entrusted to me by the President of the Republic to do everything possible to give France a budget by the end of the year.” It smacks of desperation. Macron has run out of options and run out of candidates.

    As Macron’s presidency falls apart so his friends and allies are turning on him. On Tuesday one of his former prime ministers, Édouard Philippe, urged Macron to leave office “in an orderly manner.” Another, Gabriel Attal, said that he “no longer understands” Macron’s thought process.

    Rumors about Macron’s state of mind first surfaced in 2022 when he was re-elected president but a few weeks later lost his absolute majority in parliamentary elections. On a trip to the US in December that year he confided that he had for a while been in a “very serious depression.”

    His behavior in recent days has left the French bemused; not just the public but also members of his dwindling inner circle. Speaking anonymously to Le Figaro, one Élysée insider said: “No one has any news. He is more than ever in a parallel universe.”

    Macron appears to be in a state of denial about the gravity of the crisis facing France. The country is mired in debt, violent crime is soaring and on Thursday official figures showed that immigration reached record levels in 2024. There are now 7.7 million immigrants in France, more than 11 percent of the population.

    It is chaos, but you wouldn’t know it to see the President. “Macron’s problem is that, with him, everything is always going very well,” said one of advisors.

    The rise and fall of Emmanuel Macron is one of the more remarkable political stories this century. The liberal global elite breathed a sigh of relief when he was elected in 2017. An adult was back in the room, they cheered, ready to clear up the mess made the previous year by Britain’s vote to leave the EU and America’s vote for Donald Trump.

    Macron was pictured walking on water on the cover of the Economist, and TIME magazine simpered its way through a lengthy interview with the President. It compared Macron and Trump: one “the scholarly French globalist” and the other “the brash, anti­-globalist septuagenarian.”

    TIME stated that the “battle of ideas between the two has only just begun.” In essence this was Macron’s progressivism against Trump’s anti-progressivism, which is tiresomely characterized by his enemies as populism.

    There was little doubt which side TIME was on. “If Macron is proved right,” it gushed, “France could emerge as a far more important global power than it has been in decades.”

    Sorry, TIME, your man lost. Macron has ruined France. Not just its economy and its social cohesion, but also its reputation. It has no global power and Macron has no authority. His approval rating has fallen to 14 percent (Trump’s is 40 percent) and 70 percent of the French want their president to resign.

    Macron cuts an increasingly tragic figure, alone in his palace, like Macbeth in his castle, tormented not by Banquo but by Trump.

    “Whether purposely or not,” said Trump earlier this year, “Emmanuel always gets it wrong.”

    Out, out, brief candle!

  • 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.

  • What is Charles Kushner doing in Paris?

    What is Charles Kushner doing in Paris?

    When Charles Kushner took up his appointment as American ambassador to France this summer, his first official visit was to the Shoah Memorial in Paris. As a child of Holocaust survivors, he tweeted, “fighting anti-Semitism will be at the heart of my mission.” So it has proved. Last month, Kushner published a letter in the Wall Street Journal in which he accused Emmanuel Macron of insufficient action in the face of soaring anti-Semitism in the Republic.

    The ambassador was summoned for a dressing down. He didn’t attend as he was on vacation

    Kushner also castigated the French President for his imminent recognition of Palestinian statehood. “Public statements haranguing Israel and gestures toward recognition of a Palestinian state embolden extremists, fuel violence and endanger Jewish life in France,” wrote Kushner. “In today’s world, anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism – plain and simple.”

    The American criticism of Macron mirrors that of Benjamin Netanyahu. Last month, the Israeli Prime Minister claimed the decision to recognize Palestine “pours fuel on this anti-Semitism fire.” Macron described Netanyahu’s remarks as “abject.”

    Macron didn’t respond personally to Kushner’s criticism, but the ambassador was summoned to the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs for a dressing down. Kushner didn’t attend, as he was on vacation. In his place he sent his chargé d’affaires. The magazine Paris Match described the move as “a deliberate diplomatic affront.”

    Paris said it regarded Kushner’s remarks as not only inaccurate but also undiplomatic, not being “commensurate with the quality of the transatlantic link between France and the United States and the trust that must result from it, between allies.” The ambassador’s criticism, it said, also contravened the 1961 Vienna Convention, which stipulates that diplomats are duty bound “not to interfere in the internal affairs of the state.”

    This convention was ignored in 2016 by France’s ambassador in Washington. In responding to Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton in the presidential election, Gérard Araud tweeted: “After Brexit and this election, anything is now possible. A world is collapsing before our eyes. Dizziness.” He later deleted the post.

    Araud returned to the attack in 2019 when he left Washington, declaring that Trump was a “whimsical, unpredictable, uninformed” President. The passage of time has not mellowed Araud. On learning last November that a re-elected Trump had nominated Kushner as ambassador to France, Araud tweeted: “I recommend reading his CV. ‘Juicy,’ as the Americans would say… Needless to say, he doesn’t know the first thing about our country… we console ourselves as best we can.”

    Araud was not alone in objecting to the appointment of Kushner, whose son Jared is married to Trump’s daughter Ivanka. The French media expressed surprise that a man who had spent a year in a federal prison for tax fraud (and was pardoned by Trump during his first term as President) was considered suitable for the post.

    The left-wing newspaper Le Monde wondered what exactly qualified Kushner to the post of ambassador, noting his response to the Senate when asked a similar question: “I don’t know much about French art or wine, but I understand business.”

    Democrats in America were also unimpressed by Kushner’s appointment. Severin Beliveau, a stalwart of the party in Maine and an honorary consul of France, penned a furious op-ed earlier this year explaining why Kushner should not be Uncle Sam’s man in Paris. “It is hard to find anything that qualifies Mr. Kushner for the appointment,” wrote Beliveau. “He is a convicted felon, has no diplomatic experience and can be expected to personalize the existing tensions between President Trump and the President of France.”

    Kushner, 71, does indeed have little to recommend him for the role. But the same applied to some of his predecessors in Paris. George W. Bush appointed Howard H. Leach as ambassador to France in 2001, a man whose area of expertise was food-processing. And in 2009, Barack Obama gave the job to Charles Rivkin, who had made his name as a producer of The Muppet Show. The appointment raised eyebrows in France, although it was noted that he had been one of Obama’s principal financial supporters during his presidential campaign.

    Despite his lack of diplomatic experience, Rivkin’s appointment was welcomed by the Paris elite, as mesmerized by Obama as the rest of Europe’s movers and shakers. “We couldn’t have dreamed of a better choice,” simpered Jean-David Levitte, the diplomatic advisor of president Nicolas Sarkozy. “Charlie Rivkin is the epitome of American professional success.”

    In attacking Charles Kushner, France is shooting the messenger. His criticism is not unfounded

    Once in Paris it became evident that Rivkin had one particular mission, which was to spread American-style identity politics into the suburbs. This soon came to the attention of the French press. Le Monde published an article in the summer of 2010 entitled “Washington conquers the 93” (93 is the administrative designation of the turbulent Seine-Saint-Denis département north of Paris).The paper described how Rivkin liked to visit these suburbs, sometimes with a famous face in tow, such as actor Samuel L. Jackson. According to Le Monde, “these symbolic and media junkets conceal the extent of the networking that has taken place in France in recent years to identify the elites of the neighborhoods and ethnic minorities.” Once they’d been identified, the American embassy invited these “elites” to Washington in order to “deepen their reflections on their subjects of interest.”

    The extent to which Rivkin was importing identity politics into France was exposed by WikiLeaks in 2010. On January 19 of that year, Rivkin sent a confidential report to Washington entitled “Minority Engagement Strategy.” “French institutions have not proven themselves flexible enough to adjust to an increasingly heterodox demography,” wrote Rivkin. One initiative was to work “with French museums and educators to reform the history curriculum taught in French schools, so that it takes into account the role and perspectives of minorities in French history.”

    This was clear interference, yet it raised barely a murmur in Paris. Not so the intervention of Kushner, which has caused outrage among the French elite. Jean-Noël Barrot, the minister of foreign affairs, described his criticism as “unjustifiable and unjustified… because it is not the place of a foreign representative to come and lecture France on how to govern its own country.”

    Someone has to, because Kushner is right: France is taking insufficient action to protect its 500,000 Jews. Macron’s political adversaries accuse him of abandoning the country’s Jewish population in order to pacify the violent minority within France’s large “Algerian diaspora.”

    In November 2023, Macron declined an invitation to attend a rally in solidarity with France’s Jews, who were already experiencing a surge in anti-Semitism. Allegedly he made his decision after he was warned from a Muslim advisor that his attendance might “give the neighborhoods cause to catch fire.”

    The following year, Macron vowed that France would be relentless in combating anti-Semitism, which he admitted had increased “in an absolutely inexplicable, inexcusable, and unacceptable manner.”

    In reality, the rise is eminently explicable. Once the preserve of the far right, French anti-Semitism is today most commonly found among the far left and their Islamist allies. Among the many recent anti-Semitic acts in France are the assault of a teenage boy as he left a synagogue in Lyon and the refusal of an adventure park to admit a party of Israeli children. There was also the chainsaw attack on an olive tree planted in memory of Ilan Halimi, a young Jewish man who was tortured to death in 2006 by an inner-city gang. Two Tunisian brothers have been charged with the desecration.

    Halimi’s sister says “no lessons have been learned” from her brother’s death. Increasingly she fears for her children’s safety in France and says she is thinking of emigrating to Israel. Macron, she says, is “doing nothing” to protect France’s Jews.

    In attacking Kushner, France is shooting the messenger. His criticism – supported by Washington – is not unfounded.

    This article was originally published in The Spectator’s September 15, 2025 World edition.

  • 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.

  • Are the walls closing in on Emmanuel Macron?

    Are the walls closing in on Emmanuel Macron?

    French Prime Minister François Bayrou has recalled parliament for a confidence vote on September 9, betting he can outmaneuver a surging protest movement before it paralyzes France. The grassroots “Bloquons tout” campaign, echoing the gilets jaunes (“Yellow vests”) of 2018-19 and fueled by the hard left, plans to halt trains, buses, schools, taxis, refineries and ports. It is a general strike in all but name. Bayrou’s move aims to reassert control before chaos takes hold, but with the vote just two days before the open-ended strike begins, failure could topple his government and ignite a broader assault on President Macron’s authority. This morning, Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s hard-left La France Insoumise (LFI) announced its plans to file a motion of destitution against Macron on September 23 if Bayrou falls, raising the stakes further.

    At the heart of this crisis is the economy. France’s debt has blown past 110 percent of GDP and the budget hole for 2025 stands at around $55 billion. Before the summer break, Bayrou proposed the deepest spending cuts in a generation, in a country where public spending accounts for nearly 60 percent of GDP. The unions are furious. The French are addicted to public spending and there’s a deep-seated mentality that the government owes people ever more. Mélenchon has turned the budget battle into a populist crusade against Macron’s “rich man’s government,” rallying the left and calling on supporters to shut the country down unless the cuts are scrapped. Gilets jaunes veterans have been readying to go back on the streets.

    Within minutes of the end of the press conference in Paris at which Bayrou announced the confidence vote, Marine Le Pen’s hard-right National Rally, Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s LFI and others declared they would not support the government. It also appeared yesterday evening that the Socialists were leaning against Bayrou, an immediate slap in the face for him and indirectly for Macron. This morning, Mélenchon escalated the pressure, vowing to push for Macron’s impeachment on September 23 if the vote fails, blaming the president for the crisis rather than Bayrou.

    Bayrou’s move was designed to seize the initiative before the country slides into chaos, but the arithmetic is now completely against him. To survive, he needs 289 votes. His Macron-centrist alliance can deliver barely 165. The consensus yesterday evening among journalists and leading Paris-based analysts is that the government has almost no chance of surviving. Marine Le Pen’s National Rally was the only possible lifeline, and immediately after the announcement they made clear that they would not help Bayrou. A curt statement from the RN said it was “not inclined to support” the government. Bayrou and Macron’s gamble has almost certainly failed. It looks as though Macron and Bayrou completely miscalculated their move.

    Bayrou’s bold move was meant to buy Macron time. But it now threatens to blow up his presidency

    Le Pen no doubt very rapidly concluded that there is no need to save Macron’s prime minister to satisfy her own ambitions. Polls suggest she would emerge from early parliamentary elections as the largest force in the Assembly, even if personally she cannot run. Her party would still, however, fall short of a majority, making her refusal to back Bayrou cost-free and politically advantageous. If the government falls, Macron’s authority erodes further, and the RN’s narrative of “ordinary France versus Parisian elites” hardens. Mélenchon, meanwhile, is actively pushing for Bayrou’s downfall. LFI has seized control of the anti-austerity message and united Socialists, Greens and hard-left radicals behind him. For Mélenchon, an early election offers the chance to turn street anger into parliamentary power.

    Bayrou’s bold move was meant to buy Macron time. But it now threatens to blow up his presidency. If indeed Bayrou loses the confidence vote, Macron will face an impeachment process. He could try to appoint another sacrificial prime minister to preside over austerity and strikes, but no one credible will want the job. He could also call an early election, risking handing power to Mélenchon or leaving the country even more paralyzed. Or he could simply sit tight and let the blockades and market jitters spiral while he waits out the end of his term. If Bayrou falls, Macron may limp on in the Élysée, but the Fifth Republic itself risks a reckoning.

    As Bayrou battles parliament, the markets are signaling that France’s fiscal credibility hangs by a thread. Bond yields are creeping up. Somehow the ratings agencies haven’t yet let things slide. France has held on to its top-tier status long past the point of credibility. Perhaps this is only thanks to the assumption that the country, Europe’s second biggest economy, is too big to fail. But that indulgence has its limits. Come mid-September, when the numbers are on the table and the budget battle begins, a downgrade from the rating agencies seems inevitable. This will damage France and will certainly damage Europe. A downgrade would spike borrowing costs, potentially triggering a broader sell-off in European markets.

    For eight years, Macron’s political brand has rested on him outmaneuvering his opponents and keeping France just stable enough to get by. If the government loses this confidence vote, Macron’s authority breaks. He may cling on in the Élysée, but his presidency will be weakened beyond repair. France risks months of paralysis, street unrest and financial turmoil.