Emmanuel Macron knows the story. His predecessors ended their terms with bitter tastes in their mouths. They had concluded that the French are far less brilliant than France itself. France demands things from them that contradict their desires. They also make demands to it that exceed its abilities.
It does not acknowledge that the people have changed, and the people do not acknowledge that France has changed. The blind leading the blind in violent waves and amid a deep misunderstanding that cannot be eased by government plans and calls for reason.
Macron knows the story. The French a elect a man to office and then entertain themselves by shooting arrows at him. They enjoy exhausting the state and its president. They took to the streets in 1968 and burned effigies of the distinguished General Charles de Gaulle. A year later, he seized the opportunity to resign from their fate. He said he had grown weary of the moody people, who enjoy thousands of varieties of cheese and wine.
François Mitterrand was charming, skilled, cultured and passionate. He too grew tired of them. He didn’t hide his disappointment at the end of his term even as he battled cancer. He was confident that they wouldn’t take long in rewarding him by forgetting him. On the eve of his departure, he told his friend: “In fact, I am the last in the line of great presidents.” It was as if he knew that France was going to transform into a regular state run by regular men.
Jacques Chirac would bitterly leave office was well. He would not forget the 2005 riots, the anger in the suburbs and the images of burnt vehicles and shattered storefronts. The daily events in France are nothing at all like the greatness of France.
Valery Giscard d'Estaing, who pumped modernity in the veins of the Fifth Republic and embraced the European dream, also bitterly left office. The French denied him a second term in office and the feeling that he was unable to complete his mission never left him.
From his retirement, he observed as France’s destiny was shaped by his successors. In 2017, well in his 90s, he wrote a shocking article in Le Point magazine. He said France was ill and that the people needed to treat it. He added that its economy was no longer competitive and that most products consumed by the people were not made in France. Moreover, he noted the decline in education, the efficiency of the judiciary and France’s role in the European and international arenas.
France is ill. It is enflamed by a policeman’s killing of a teen with non-French roots. Even though the officer was arrested and charged, the fire continues to burn. France would not be facing such a situation had the residents of the suburbs felt that the crime would not have happened if the teen had come from a different background and had different features. There can be no denying that successive governments have spent billions on integration plans, but they have evidently failed.
France is indeed ill. It has not paid enough attention to its own demographic changes, especially over the past two decades. It refuses to acknowledge that the “new French” don’t resemble the “old French”. It stands bewildered before the stark facts.
A French teen in the suburbs doesn’t want to resemble the France that took in his father and gave him job opportunities. He hates the police and senses their racism. He doesn’t trust the judiciary and believes it is biased. He doesn’t trust the entire institution. He believes that the neighborhood he is living in is a form of punishment against him and those who resemble him. He lights a fire in cars and rejoices, as if the flames will deliver his message. There is always a minority that never misses an opportunity to loot and riot, offering the far-right new ammunition in their hostility to migrants.
Has technology complicated the integration process? It unintentionally became part of the problem. Two decades ago, a migrant would arrive in France dreaming of a new opportunity and life less harsh than the one he left behind in his native country. Communication wasn’t as accessible to his homeland as it is now. He can remain in contact with his village and loved ones and remain involved in conflicts in his native country. He believes that his identity is sacred. It cannot be changed or modified or accept values that are promoted in his new society, which does not share his religious, ethnic or cultural values. There are French teens who don’t care about the national anthem or the values of the Republic.
The role of social media and the hatred that floods through it doesn’t need to undermine other facts, such as poverty and marginalization.
The debates and images broadcast on French television in recent days demonstrate the extent of the divisions in society and loss in finding a solution. Oppression is not the answer and leaving the unrest unchecked will lead to catastrophe. Some fear that France, with its various peoples, fears and hatred, is headed towards civil war.
Allowing the rule of law to prevail and restoring the authority of the state are not the whole solution. The solution demands an accurate diagnosis of the illness and an economic, political and cultural plan to allow all French people to be part of society, which would be protected by institutions that cater to everyone.
The police force and education also need to be reformed. A cultural plan must be drafted and focus on dialogue and the right to be different under the rule of law. The belief that the “new French” are a ticking time bomb and danger to the French identity will not solve the problem. In turn, the “new French” must show some openness, because exhausting and paralyzing France will affect all of its residents without exception.
Emmanuel Macron is really unlucky. France is ill, inside and out. Through his invasion of Ukraine, Vladimir Putin succeeded in pushing for a multipolar world. At the same time, however, he weakened Europe, including France, and his own country. Macron looks on at the French patient. He hopes that the people will not let him down by failing to find a cure as they did with his predecessors.
