— by Tom Owens —
France has just seen a revolution in their political landscape. The old guard is out. Emmanuel Macron, a new, little known politician started a new party and went on to win the Presidency. He now faces parliamentary elections to gain seats and legislative influence. He is doing well by incorporating ideas from all sides. Politics as usual may be over. Inclusive politics may be on the rise. Wouldn’t it be nice to see this in the United States?
The major old-line French parties are the Party Socialist (held the prior presidency); Les Republicans (the conservatives); the Front Nationale (the far right) plus nine more parties. They are all run by career politicians and with long standing party positions. Major things got done only when one party held both the Presidency and a parliamentary majority (Chirac being an exception). Otherwise, everyone fights for their party positions and little gets done. (Sound familiar?)
What happened in the 2017 French election? Round 1 was a defeat for the Centrist and Socialist parties. En Marche (Macron’s party) and the Front Nationale (far right, Le Pen) were the top two vote-getters and moved to the second round. Round 2 saw Macron win with about 60% of the vote and Le Pen defeated with about 30% of the vote. One-third of voters either did not vote or voted for no one.
Macron, without previous election experience, became President of the French Republic. The old parties and their fixed ideas were defeated. Parliamentary elections are next, where Macron hopes to gain seats and influence. He has included people from other parties in his cabinet (ministers). The new Prime Minister is from an opposition party. An era of compromise and inclusive politics may be emerging in France.
What can we learn here? Wouldn’t it be nice to see our US elected officials, both State and Federal, after making their policies clear, work toward inclusive solutions with the other party that benefit each of us, regardless of our party affiliation? Most of the time, all I hear from my elected state officials (Ranker and Inslee) is what the other party is doing wrong and how bad their ideas are (and please send a check). I would bet the Republicans are doing the same thing. Certainly, in each party’s positions there is something the other side could find acceptable. Why can’t we hear about the positives of both sides? Why not try some inclusive politics? Wouldn’t it be great to feel that everyone’s views were being included, not just those of the “winning” party? Are politics always supposed to be win/loose? Perhaps my suffering through 9th grade civics was all a waste of time.
