Daily Times

Sanity took a sigh of relief on Sunday as the globalist Emmanuel Macron won the French presidential election, with a staggering 65 percent of votes, against the populist Marine Le Pen.

Francoise Hollande had won the presidency with only 52 percent of popular vote in 2012 and Nickolas Sarkozy with only 53 percent in 2007.

With the latest election outcome, the French society has rejected xenophobia and given a much-needed respite to Europe and rest of the world.

The electoral system for French presidency comprises two rounds of voting: all candidates take part in the first round, and the top two candidates contend in the second — needing at least 50 percent votes to win the presidency. Such a system not only allows multi-party candidates representing a variety of opinions within the society, but also ensures that the winner has support from at least half of the electorate. For instance, Jean-Luc Melanchon’s leftist La France Insoumise and Francois Fillon’s centre-rightist Republican Party each got almost 20 percent of the votes in the first round. Both parties trailed Macron (24 percent) and Le Pen (21 percent) but secured enough votes to convey the public mood to the legislators and the next president.

Furthermore, any candidate gaining more than five percent votes in the first round is reimbursed half of her campaign expenses by the state — to reduce corruption and allow people with relatively fewer resources to contest elections. With their anger vented in the first round, people from the left and the right could come together to vote for a centrist like Macron. In comparison, a more complex and out-dated Electoral College system for the US presidential race allows candidate with fewer popular votes to win the election.

The second factor that helped Macron’s win was the apprehension regarding Donald Trump within the French society. Followed by the Brexit referendum last June, Donald Trump’s win in the US presidential elections had sent chills around the world and raised concerns about the growing xenophobia in the West. The media frenzy that followed his win and the weakening of American exceptionalism alerted many people in Europe. Thus, the American elections cast an unprecedented influence over the French elections. On the one hand, Le Pen’s supporters promoted her as a Trump-like populist candidate and portrayed Macron as the Hillary Clinton of France — a member of the global elite with close ties to Germany’s Angela Merkel. On the other hand, Macron’s supporters played on the failures of Donald Trump, urging people to prevent a Trump-like takeover of France. This strategy paid off as many people, including many of my own friends in France, voted for Macronnot because they were excited about him but because they feared the repercussion of having a Donald Trump sitting in the presidency.

The third factor pertains to the strong welfare system in France. Life is becoming increasingly arduous for agriculture and industrial workers in the West due to dwindling employment opportunities as a result of automation and shifting of businesses overseas. Devoid of a hope for a better future, these worker soften resort to xenophobia and nationalism, accusing everyone from the elites to the immigrants for their anguish.

Thanks to the French social welfare system, however, the French workers were not as disgruntled as their American and British counterparts. French state offers substantial support such as healthcare, education, transportation, and unemployment benefits to citizens who need it. The state also provides a comprehensive job retraining programme for those previously employed in defunct industries, letting them acquire new skills for in-demand occupations. Such pampering reduces anger within this group, as they feel they are being taken care of by society at large. Therefore, the anger that swept through these demographics in the US bringing Trump in power, was much weaker a factor in France.

A final yet crucial factor in Macron’s victory is the distinct attitude of the French society vis-à-vis immigrants.

Like the White working classes in the US, French working classes also blames immigrants for taking over low-paying jobs that they would be willing to do for higher comparative wages. Low-rent public housing in France is often referred to as taxpayer-subsidised servants’ quarters for the metropolitan rich who contract low-cost services of immigrant men and women — working as nannies, drivers, and caretakers. The native workers hope that sending these immigrants back will increase demand for such jobs, raising salaries and opening more opportunities for them.

Though these concerns may be similar to those found in the US, France offers a completely different way to manage her immigration problems. The American society deals with immigrants by respecting their solitude, and giving them space to practice their religion and culture without much intrusion. As a result, immigrant populations develop social network within their own communities that persist over generations. The French society, on the other hand, expects its immigrants to assimilate and become ‘French’. The sense of otherness is much diluted when the immigrant is viewed as a potential member of the French community. Scholars of history and sociology like Francis Fukuyama and Thomas Cahill trace these differing attitudes to religious underpinning of these societies: The French society is predominantly Catholic and hence more community-oriented, whereas the Protestant US has a more individualist culture. Although religion itself plays a much weaker role in these societies, especially the French — these attitudes have pervaded culture over centuries.

The French election results have given a much-needed boost to the European Union, which is now more likely to survive than it was till last week. As the new leadership begins working on its regional and global agendas, it is expected that it will also tend to the needs of the forgotten worker who requires support from the state to make the transition from traditional farming and industrial jobs to service oriented occupations.

The writer is a lecturer of Public Policy and Administration at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He can be reached at obedpasha@gmail.com. His Twitter handle is @RamblingSufi