First measures are likely to be the suppression of inheritance tax and a few other income tax lowerings.

Sarkozy really won with old people and I think the issue that he rode was the immigration one.  He was elected by the old generation that fears a different france.  It will be very curious to see if the final tally confirms what the polls indicated, that Royal one with every age group under 65.  

I hope that Sarkozy does the one great move re: immigration I think he can make for France and I ask that everyone start suggesting it.  Open up immigration to Americans.  France and Europe are at a historic high-point and have the ability to poach some of the best and brightest aux Etats-Unis.  Using the standard types of qualifications one can easily make this the type of "good immigration" that the old guard expects.  

Lastly, I look forward to the scandals re: Cecilia.  

The question is now, how much resistance will he face from unions and civil society organizations?

This view of Europe is to establish a very strong and efficient political organisation which is not in line at all with what the Anglo-saxon lobbies would like to ear.

I "hope" the very low growth in US/UK that is planned for this year will moderate the comments by liberal pundits in FT etc..

i am quite happy ;-)

Those of us who love France respect the wish of its people to change towards what some call "Anglo-Saxon" economics. We share some of th concern of our French friends that this should not mean a reduction in the quality of French social policies - a model for all countries. Above all. what we don't want to see is a change to French life and style - by far one of the most precious aspects of our European

The ineffable Welshman, trying to preempt kossack opinions.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

you are the media you consume.

America: you cannot be an obstacle to the fight against global warming. This will be France's first fight.

Interesting...

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

Un Pyromane à l'Elysée Le Nouvel Horizon de Dakar

Le rêve obsessionnel de "l'Iznogoud de Neuilly" de s'installer enfin à la place du calife Chirac s'est réalisé. Ne reculant devant rien, Sarkozy, pratiquant une politique du bouc émissaire vieille comme le monde en jouant sur les peurs et les fantasmes des Français, a réussi à installer durablement dans le débat national le thème de l'insécurité, auquel sont automatiquement associés les immigrés. Des immigrés dont il prévoit de "nettoyer au Kärcher" les rejetons turbulents quand il ne leur reproche pas d'égorger des "moutons dans les baignoires". Pour atteindre cet objectif, Sarkozy a fait feu de tout bois, n'hésitant pas pratiquant la surenchère xénophobe avec sa proposition de créer un ministère de "l'immigration et de l'identité nationale", lui dont le père est pourtant venu d'une obscure bourgade hongroise.

Certains supporters du petit Napoléon de l'UMP n'ont pourtant pas manqué de prendre leurs distances par rapport à cette dernière trouvaille, sans vouloir admettre une évidence qui saute pourtant aux yeux : la lepénisation de Sarkozy. Les incidents survenus à la gare du Nord, après qu'un banal contrôle d'identité eut tourné en quasi émeute avec des jeunes issus de l'immigration conspuant le nom de Sarkozy, présage des moments chauds que s'apprête à vivre la France avec une présidence Sarkozy.

Sarkozy, le cauchemar des Africains Le Bénin aujourd'hui

Il le désirait ardemment, de manière apparemment obsessionnelle et il l'a eu : le pouvoir suprême. Le second tour de la présidentielle a consacré Nicolas Sarkozy à la tête de la France. Entre la gauche et la droite, les Français ont donc choisi dans leur majorité de rester à droite.

(...)

L'élection de Sarkozy à la magistrature suprême n'enlève en rien le mérite de son challenger socialiste Ségolène Royal. Bien au contraire. Elle est la preuve éloquente que ce n'est pas seulement sous nos tropiques que le conservatisme a la vie dure. Première femme française à avoir accédé à ce niveau de la compétition politique, elle apparaît comme la victime expiatoire de la France qui a peur d'être Présidente. Elle a démontré, et pendant les primaires au sein de son parti et pendant la campagne électorale à proprement parler, qu'elle était bel et bien à la hauteur de la charge pour laquelle elle a sollicité les suffrages des Français. En affrontant le nouveau président de la République qu'elle a même mis en difficulté et en faisant montre de beaucoup de talents politiques lors du débat radiotélévisé. Et la logique du jeu aurait voulu que, mis à part la personnalité et les grandes promesses de Sarkozy, la droite paye les conséquences de sa politique de ses dernières années.

(...)

Cette préférence des Africains pour Royal ne résulte pas uniquement de la position du nouveau président élu sur l'immigration. Elle procède aussi du fait de ses convictions politiques, voire de sa personnalité qui laisse soupçonner un certain relent de condescendance.

He already gave agreement on the Constitution. Though he'd oppose too much cross-border free markets, I guess. But I am not optimistic in any way. There was a time the Scandinavian states were viewed as inmutably socialistic.

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}

NEWS ALERT from The Wall Street Journal

Sarkozy was elected France's new president with tough proposals aimed at shaking France out of its deep economic and social slump, defeating Socialist rival Royal by a solid margin in the final round of elections.

Sarkozy collected 53% of the votes cast, according to preliminary counting of ballots by CSA polling agency.  Royal took 47%, CSA said.

The platforms of the two candidates had many points where two different pathways were clearly articulated.  The voters turned out at a very high rate of participation, and the answer was clear--53%-47%.

After such an exciting campaign, after the French people participated in such great numbers, and with the issues more clearly laid out than in many campaigns I have seen, the French people have spoken in a democracy.  And your response to all of this is depressingly negative:

Soon, it will appear that he is still French. Mutterings about the uselessness of expecting better from them will start to be heard. Talk about missed opportunities will crop up, as will eventually that of decline, again.

I give them less than a year.

All of the major Western democracies have major issues in front of them--not just the French.  But it is the French who have spoken today.  Wouldn't it be more helpful, certainly more hopeful, to try to interpret what has been said?

There seems to be consensus for example on global warming--that's worth discussing, and at least acknowledging if that is true.  Is there a majority that is voting for Sarko's theme of rewarding work more than it is today?  Of if not getting rid of the 35 hour work week, taking his approach of rewarding more highly work over 35 hours a week?  And there are so many other issues that were presented with clearly alternate pathways.

It seems a shame not to at least understand what the message is from the French voters, in this wonderful demonstration of democracy in action.  (screw the International Press!)

I do agree that Sarkozy is unlikely to attempt radical reform in the way the WSJ would prefer, if for no other reason than fear of political suicide.  Much of his right-wing stances were, I suspect, largely the result of needing Le Pen's people to show up.  That just goes with the territory of political campaigns -- the price inevitably paid at times in a democracy.

Nonetheless, it was quite an interesting campaign, and thanks to everybody for writing so much on the topic for guys like me.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

ANSA 21:05

If I understand his drivel, the communists have been in power in France for the past five or ten years- well, ok, the past 218 years.

Seeing as Sarko has the same program as B, I'm looking forward to seeing the French mob occupy the ministries.

In the short term, we lose a lot on the Left.  But, when we're right, eventually the rest of the people get it.  In the meantime, at least the envelope is pushed.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

http://www.interieur.gouv.fr/sections/a_votre_service/resultats-elections/PR2007/index.html

(some departements have results for second round like 81 - Tarn)

Now who voted white en masse, Le Pen, Bayrou, Left voters?

So in a certain way, the question is whether the cult of personality and the discourse of self-pity that is at the heart of the Sarkozy campaign can be translated into any sort of governmental program, or will we have simply 5 years of spin and political attacks on opponents?

His trick was to emphasize hot button issues like abortion, immigration and "security" to appeal to fear and resentment. What he delivered was tax breaks for the rich and a war which has increased insecurity.

His followers (especially the religious right) have recently started to realize that they've been had.

Is Sarkozy going to eliminate the 35 hour week? How about reducing worker's rights? What is he really going to do about the immigrant sector that can't blend in?

In the US it was easy to see who was pulling the strings. They even put their puppet master in as VP to ensure that the energy sector got what it wanted. Who pulls the strings in Sarkozy's case and what do they want now that he has won?

Policies not Politics
---- Daily Landscape

i don't what it is like in other villes but there is a grand demonstration here tonight

Posted by: r'giap | May 6, 2007 4:29:20 PM | 21

Can't find anything about this - is it true? I think that would be in Avignon?!

But if we are wrong, I suspect things will become quite interesting in the streets. Supposing of course a confirmation of the tendancy in the legislatives to come.

Either way, it will be hard to turn his back with the reforms one supposes he will enact, given they will prove quite unpopular with those taken by his 11th hour rassambleur rhetoric.

Either candidate would, alas, have had to be elected under false pretenses to some extent...

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

How wrong I was.

Condolences to my favorite country in Europe, France.

in an extended version. Here's what I added:

Nobody knows what Sarkozy will do as president, because he has basically promised everything and its opposite and because, when he was in power, he did nothing but posturing. It's possible that he will try to go for radical 'reform', arguing that he has a strong mandate from the French; it's possible that he'll be like Chirac, doing essentially nothing because getting power was the only goal, not exercising it.

In his speech, he has for the time being repeated the usual mantras ('revalue work, discipline, order, honor, nation') but he has also given his speech a decidely lefty bend, by saying that he is the president of all the French, and that he will not let anyone fall by the wayside. It's the same contradictory mix that he has used in his campaign and which seems to have worked: the call to traditional values, and the suggestion that he will be better at protecting people. It has been particularly effective with older people, and he has managed to capture a good chunk of the Le Pen voters; his "dog whistle" pronouncements against immigrants have obviously been effective.

The thing is, there has been so much doom and gloom discourse in the country that anybody that sounds like he knows what he's doing (even though he is actually already in power and to be blamed for the funk) appears like the messiah. When you ask people why they vote for him, it's all down to his looking more serious (remnants of machismo?), sounding tough, and appearing to know issues better. Never mind that this is a media created, carefully spinned image, it has dominated discourse on actual ideas. (Values before policies, sounds familiar?)

In fact, given his speech this evening, it might be even quicker.

France will always be at America's side when it needs us, but I want to tell Americans that friendship means tolerating that friends think differently

This is essentially the same line Chirac was on, and the same line as previous presidents, and it is the traditional position of the French diplomacy. We're your friends, and we don't mind saying it (loudly) when we disagree. As he has long claimed to be more pro-American than Chirac et al., he might get away for a bit with critical stances (especially if he peppers his pronouncements with symbolic signs of friendship), but at some point, there will be a major sticking point.

And that might quickly be it:

"A great nation like the USA has the duty not to block the fight against global climate warming, and, indeed, to take the lead in that fight, because what's at stake is the future of the whole human race."

As he even added that this would be "France's first priority", and as we all know the Bush administration's position on this, the next 18 months might get interesting quickly. This was a pretty direct challenge, on a pretty fundamental issue. I was happy to hear this bit, I must admit. I have no idea yet whether he'll follow through (and a natural inclination, from his past, not to believe a word he says), but it is nevertheless interesting that he chose such a specific stance - one he knew would be a direct provocation to the Bush White House, and one that can get him kudos from outside the usual supporters of the right.

With Brown and Merkel having also made a lot of noise about climate change, this might actually be a topic where Europe impudently stands up to Bush, which means that Sarkozy is likely to turn in your media into "yet another Frenchman who does not understand the challenges of the 21st century."

:: ::

Again, I'll say it. I have no idea what Sarkozy stands for, apart form his personal career. Now that he's reached the position he's lusted after for 30 years, what will he do with it? Will he just follow polls and spin? (In which case, watch out for the ideology of Lagardère (pro-business) and Dassault (reactionary), two family-owned military hardware and media groups who own most of the French media and whose bosses are personal friends of Sarkozy). Will he actually stand for something? Either way, playing the anti-American card smartly (while snidely pretending to be pro-American) is likely to be popular.

In a sense, this should be fun. The French bashing media have the candidate of their dreams elected. Will they tolerate to make France look as if it's up again, even if it is thanks to their ideology, or will they rather prefer to see it down, as it "should" be, being, you know, French, and give up on their champion?

I'm betting on the latter. The French are hopeless (i.e. even Sarkozy won't "reform" us).

Reagan waited six months for his first opportunity to begin going after syndicated labour, when he fired striking PATCO air traffic controls en masse, declaring their strike a threat to National Security.  Of course much of the press took this point of view, and as I recall from those days, the anti-union mantra was repeated in every communications channel; the daily papers, weekly news journals, television news and university lecture halls.

Thatcher also went about de-unionizing the country piece by piece.  Her boost in popularity following the Falklands war made it possible for her to take on the National Union of Mineworkers one year into her second mandate. Five years after first being elected.

There are many differences between then and now; a shortened news cycle, shortened attention spans, more diffuse channels through which we can pull in information (internet blogs), and through which information is pushed or propagated.  All of which can lead to churning up a backlash if Sarkozy fails to move fast enough.

For Sarko to announce any threatening and radical policy changes would be foolish at the opening of the legislative election campaign.  Then again, I might eat these words with relish tomorrow or next week.

Further, unlike Bush when he came into office in 2000, Sarko is already recognised as a dividing and divisive force in French politics.  He must realise that before he can effect any change he needs to overcome this perception.  For a practical chameleon who values his hard fought place at the top of the political rock, this weighs against any hasty pronouncements about swift change, and in favour of buying and biding time.

I think given France's reputation for resistance to change the WSJ, FT, NYT et. al editors and pundits will be patient to wait until clear opportunities arise.  Even perhaps scaring up a Falklands moment.  Unfortunately for him Verdun has been done.  Or they might simply ride shotgun on facing down a medium profile union, in the interest of state security, or  finding some other means of breaking the bonds of solidarity between the CGT, CFDT, FO. et al.  

It all depends on which opportunities are presented and how and when.

Their patience and opportunism could last well past the inauguration of the next US president, unlikely to be found in bed with the neocons, and facing a monumental fiscal crisis and with whom Sarkozy will have to work in the 3 year run up to his bid for a second mandate.

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/06/2030242

I posted:

Pro-software patent, DMCA and voting machines

Most important for slashdot readers: Nicolas Sarkozy is a lawyer and has a very strong pro-software patent stance and was behind the hardline DADVSI [wikipedia.org] copyright law (our local DMCA). He was also behind the introduction of voting machines without paper trail requirements, and of the "secret" report about their validity (no citizen could get the report.

More in the PDF with his answers to the "candidats.fr" initiative here.

Hard time for free software in France. There are still the parliament election next month, but last time french voters put the majority behind the president.

http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=233693&cid=19013305

1.)  Are there more registered female voters in France as in the USA?  If so, why didn't they overwhelmingly vote for the female just as a "first?"
and
2.)  If the demographics are the same as the US as I suspect they are; does this presage a difficult time for Hillary?

alohapolitics.com

I don't see this ending well.

And the world will live as one

dissapointed already to see sk vy for his position in leadership 2 minutes after announcement

i disagree with migeru - it is possible that the legislatives can be won if their is no clannish activity by the ps

but one thing is quite clear

it is the poor & the powerless in france who will suffer most & they are already under great pressure

people rush to absolutes as they once ran(& perhaps will in the future)to the water

still steel

 Will the Frenchies hate me if I admit to a bit of schadenfreude? Though perhaps an equally good description would be 'misery loves company' ;)

Anyways, Jerome has pointed out that Sarko won't fulfill the WSJ's dreams. On the other hand the way it looks to me is that you guys just elected a French Rudy Giuliani. Strongly authoritarian, asshole, conservative instincts but no real ideological commitment, insanely ambitious, divisive, strongest appeal to the 'give us some law and order. Like Rudy, Sarko will be operating in an environment that keeps him from being too right wing, but won't stop him from being just plain nasty. Enjoy.

PS Those folks dreaming of civil society pushing him out - be careful. As long as he isn't unpopular, that will only make swing voters turn against the opposition.

PPS Watching the results roll in was strange from an American perspective - here if you had a 53.5-46.5 right-left with only the urban areas remaining to be counted, it would mean that the left had won. Same goes for Poland with the caveat that economic policy isn't what determines left/right. I knew that wasn't the case, but still disconcerting.

Bush has done nothing right.

I believe that President-elected Gore would have done the right thing on nuclear issues.  He's much closer to nuclear energy than people might suppose.   He's had some excellent nuclear policies.

The crowd in the hall where Sarkozy declared victory after the polls closed repeatedly sang the national anthem, La Marseillaise -- with its famous xenophobic refrain, "Marchons, marchons! Qu'un sang impur abreuve nos sillons!" (Translation: Let us march, let us march, May impure blood soak the furrows of our fields.) And Sarkozy's campaign was marked by incessant appeals to racism and the fear of immigrants, symbolized by his adoption of a slogan used by the neo-fascist leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, "France, love it or leave it," and by his proposal for a new "Ministry of Immigration and National Identity," which was widely criticized by the left and by anti-racist groups for amalgamating the two concepts and suggesting a fundamental opposition between the two.

In fact, the campaign strategy of "Sarko," as he is referred to in France, was based on his appeal to the electorate of Le Pen (right) and his Front National party, which in the last presidential election in 2002 had beaten the Socialists for the place in the run-off against then-president Jacques Chirac. That lurch to the right five years ago by a significant portion of formerly left voters was confirmed by today's vote, in which more than two-thirds of former Le Pen voters -- many of them from the one-time Communist-dominated working class suburbs -- went for Sarkozy, according to the exit polls.

Indeed, as the weekly Le Canard Enchaine -- which has the best insider political gossip -- reported a couple of weeks ago, a Sarkozy confident of victory had already discussed his long-term political strategy for remaining in power -- for, as Le Canard revealed, he plans to integrate the Front National into his ruling UMP party in his second term, uniting the hard-right and the neo-fascist extreme right in an alliance imitating that operated by the Italian Silvio Berlusconi with the "post-fascist" Alleanza Nationale of Gianfranco Fini (right), who was Berlusoconi's vice-premier.

[...]

Sarko believes in minimal government, a slimmed-down state that interferes as little as possible in the economy, an aggressively laissez-faire approach that is dear to the economic barons of the MEDEF, the French business leaders' association, whose tycoons were solidly behind Sarkozy's candidacy. Sarkozy has already promised to, in effect, abolish the ISF (the tax on large fortunes), accord more tax breaks to big business and the upper-middle-classes, and make more cuts in the state-run national health system (declared by a U.N. survey to be the finest in the world in terms of delivery of health services and quality of care.) Sarkozy's economic program is designed to help the already-privileged classes retain and extend their socio-economic position, to the detriment of the have-nots (the massive pro-Sarkozy vote in the upper-income neighborhoods today confirms that they understood Sarko's message to them.) And he has promised a major down-sizing of the civil service employed by state agencies.

What I was saying about the French trains running on time... maybe I should take that back.

This ability of the Bushes, the Berlus, the Sarkos, the Maggies, to present an elite upper-class agenda as if it would be a boon to the middle classes, and thus to woo those middle classes away from the national interest, i.e. encourage them to stomp on the backs of the poor to claw their way into the elite heaven (which they will never get to, as we all know, but oh how they love to believe they will)... it's just amazing.  Essentially they are running the country as a great big entertaining Survivor show and inviting the bourgeoisie to vote everyone else off the island.  And it works...  and then when the elite predators start preying on their own middle classes as they inevitably do, the victims can still be persuaded to blame Immmigrants or Women or Furriners (or sunspots or the Devil or whatever) instead of the guys whose hands are so conspicuously picking everyone's pockets.  It's like a stage magician who's incredibly, pathetically clumsy and obvious and yet the enthralled audience keeps cheering and clapping and somehow pretending not to see the wires 'n stuff.

I woulda thought that France's nuke fan club would be dreading the advent of Sarko.  After enough privatisation, crony capitalism, no-bid cost-plus contracts, secrecy and obfuscation, security apparatus repressing citizen participation, etc., I'm sure he can turn the French nuclear sector into the same massive fubar it is in the States.  The only reason it even seems to work (mho) is because of the high calibre of French public servants, the strong regulatory presence of the State and relatively open process.  Sarko plans to demolish all that, if he can get away with it.

I'm depressed...  the only bright spot, I suppose, is that if the Bush regime finally faces impeachment trials and there are convictions, publication of damning documents, etc. then Sarko will look a bit pie-faced for being such a Bush buddy.  If the Bush mafia were to take a serious dive, it might have beneficial repercussions in Oz, Canada, and France...

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

Two thirds of French people think their country is in decline. That is without doubt the principal reason why Nicolas Sarkozy was elected President of the Republic. Moreover, the main way the media contributed to his triumph was by years of constant propaganda on the theme of "the decline of France", along with the related theme of "security".

There are various ways to counter that notion. One is to show that the selection and interpretation of the statistics used to "prove" France's decline are extremely biased. (For example, on the subject of youth unemployment, see Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, in Washington, D.C., "An Economist View of the French Election".)

Another approach is to ask what solutions are proposed by the heralds of "decline".

The declinists cleverly mix up two problems. One is the decline of France in relation to the emerging countries, especially in Asia. The other is the supposed decline of France in relation to other industrialized countries, especially the United States and Britain. The first form of "decline" is merely the reflection of a very positive development: the fact that large parts of the Third World are catching up with the industrialized West. But, since it would make no sense to propose imitating China and India, the declinists propose imitating the Anglo-American model, which is supposed to avoid decline by a series of measures: flexible work conditions, destruction of hard-won social protections and public services, tough security enforcement and moral rearmament.

But let's take a closer look at their favorite model, the United States. [...]

repeating a lie often enough makes it true.

of course, with a neocon in charge it is likely that quality of life in France really will start to decline, except for the 5 percent at the top of the income pyramid.  and then there will be 'proof' that Sarko is needed to save the day...

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...