DOCSLIB.ORG

Contemporary France

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Contemporary France Contemporary France Contemporary France Politics and society stnce 1945 D. L. Hanley, A. P. Kerr and N. H. Waites !:) ~~ ~~o~~~~n~~:up (:) LONDON AND NEW YORK First published 1979 by Routledge & Kegan Paul Published 2017 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business Copyright © D. L. Hanley, A. P. Kerr and N. II. Waites 1979, 1984 The Open Access version of this book, available at www.tandfebooks.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Hanley, D. L. (David L.), Contemporary• France. Bibliography: p. Includes index I. France-Politics and government-1958-. 2. France-Social conditions-1945-. 3. France- Economic conditions-1945-. I. Kerr, A. P. II. Waites, N. H. (Neville H.) lll. Title UN2594.2.1135 1984 944.082 84-6895 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data available ISBN 9780415025225 (pbk) Contents Preface and acknowledgments ix Abbreviations xi 1 The French experience since 1944 1 2 The structures of contemporary France 52 3 The political framework 93 4 Political forces 126 5 External relations 175 6 The education system 213 Notes 263 Bibliographical essay 277 Index 294 Figures 2.1 Agricultural workers as percentage of total workforce per country, 54 1900–74 2.2 Location of industrial activity, January 1974 57 2.3 Penetration of French industry by foreign capital, 1970 60 2.4 Average productivity per farm, 1982—comparison between 64 departments 4.1 Seating arrangements of deputies in the national assembly, 1981 160 5.1 Influences on external relations 188 5.2 Decision-making system for defence policy 194 6.1 Organization of the education ministry, 1983 218 6.2 Map of the académies, 1983 220 6.3 Organization of the rectorat, 1983 221 Tables 1.1 Growth of French production, 1947–58 3 1.2 Presidential election 26 April 1981, first ballot 45 2.1 GDP per head of developed nations since 1960 52 2.2 Value of French exports since 1962 53 2.3 French energy consumption 55 2.4 French firms by size, 1981 58 2.5 French trade with franc zone 61 2.6 French agricultural production, 1981 62 2.7 French farm sizes, 1979 62 2.8 The weight of agriculture in the European economies, 1982 63 2.9 Employment in tertiary sector, 1962–78 65 2.10 Workforce in commerce 66 2.11 Unemployment trends in France since 1965 67 2.12 Unemployment in France by socio-economic group (CSP), 67 (a) 1981 (b) Unemployment by age and sex, 1981 67 2.13 Comparative trends in fertility in Europe, 1861–1939 69 2.14 Average number of births per annum in France, 1945–62 70 2.15 French population by age and sex, 1975 71 2.16 Population decline in rural departments, 1968–75 72 2.17 Population by economic activity, 1975 and 1954 73 2.18 Origins of workers’ fathers by CSP, 1964 75 2.19 Household income by CSP, 1975 79 2.20 Index of disparity for household incomes by CSP, 1975 80 2.21 French households, 1978: owners and occupiers 83 2.22 Characteristics of accommodation by CSP, 1978 84 2.23 Annual access to health facilities by CSP, 1973 84 2.24 Life expectancy by CSP, 1971 85 2.25 Cultural activity by CSP, December 1974 85 4.1 Majority parties since 1958 130 4.2 Electorate of major parties in the 1970s 134 4.3 The right’s electorate in the 1960s 135 4.4 Electorate of major parties, June 1981, first ballot 149 4.5 Main political forces during the Fifth Republic, performance 162 in general elections 4.6 Union strength in elections to social institutions, 1945–83 166 5.1 Defence force comparisons, selected states, 1982 192 5.2 Defence expenditures, 1984 to 1988 194 5.3 Exports of war materials from France 195 6.1 Teachers’ salaries per month as at 1 July 1983 223 6.2 Left-wing sympathy according to religion 232 6.3 Extent of the zone prioritaire policy 1982–3 247 6.4 Evolution of French student population, 1977–81, according 257 to socio-professional category of parents Preface and acknowledgments This textbook is designed mainly for use by students in departments of French Studies or European Studies, i.e. those who in addition to learning the French language are studying the social and political structure of modern France. We also hope, however, that it will be of interest to students in politics departments, perhaps by dint of its rather different approach. Our book aims to analyse the working of the French political system and set this into its social and economic context. We give considerable attention to the latter, in fact, and spend less time than some authors on the formal mechanisms of government decision-making; in our view, these are more than adequately analysed in much recent work on French politics (see bibliography) which fits into the ‘government and politics’ tradition, rather than into the ‘politics and society’ approach undertaken here. A second feature of the book is that its approach is historical. This reflects not simply the fact that its authors all teach modern French history, but also a methodological belief common to them all, viz. that a social system can only be understood in any of its constituent parts—political, cultural or whatever—if analysed in terms of its historical development. For this reason we begin with a general historical outline of developments in key sectors—social and economic structures, domestic politics, foreign relations— since 1945. After this, specific aspects of the social and political system are then analysed in turn, again from a historical point of view. It is hoped that thus equipped students will be able to engage in further exploration of French politics and society. Our book therefore embodies a third distinctive feature, a critical bibliography. At the risk of sacrificing quantity for quality, we have tried to give some idea of what various secondary works involve (degree of difficulty, type of analysis, etc.), rather than giving the undifferentiated list in alphabetical order that some textbooks use. As we assume that any serious student of contemporary France will have a reading knowledge of the language, no special effort has been made to single out material in English. So far as possible we have tried to avoid jargon and to explain fully our terminology. This may involve being over-explicit in places; but we feel that this is a risk worth taking in a work which aims above all to initiate. Although there was clearly a division of labour among the authors (D.L.Hanley was responsible for chapters 1(1), 1(4), 1(5), 2, 3(3) and 4: A.P.Kerr for 1(3), 3(1), 3(2) and 6: and N.H.Waites for 1(2) and 5), this work is to some extent a joint effort, in that it represents several years of dialogue and shared experience. None the less, readers will notice clear differences of emphasis or approach in some parts of the book. There are no apologies to be made for this: it simply reflects the fact that in the social sciences there are in the end no definite answers, particularly in the study of a society like contemporary France, which is clearly in a period of dynamic change. But this does not mean that the book fails to express any opinions; the authors have made their viewpoints and conclusions clear at each stage of the book rather than impose a formal conclusion at the very end. Their intention is to encourage argument and discussion among readers who can formulate judgments of their own on the basis of the text, followed up by the recommended reading. Our thanks are due to the staffs of several institutions, who helped us greatly with documentation—the Centre de documentation of the Ministère de l’éducation and the former Ministère des universités: the Institut d’études politiques: the Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques (rue de Bercy, Paris): the French Embassy, London: the Royal Institute of International Affairs: the Service de traitement de l’information et de la statistique industrielle. We are also grateful to the Research Board of Reading University for the provision of money to facilitate our research and to Reading University Library for helping to provide resources in books and periodicals despite severe financial cuts. Many individuals helped particularly in the preparation of this book, by giving expert advice or technical assistance, or answering questions. Our thanks are offered to them in alphabetical order—J.Boisson, C.Calvez, S.Cann, G.de Carmoy, P.Collet, A.Duguet, M.Fowkes, D.Hay, P.M.Jones, V.Laloy, F.Loncle, J.Ouvrier, K.Sainsbury, F.de la Serre, A.Shlaim, M.Vaïsse and P.Woodward. For the second edition we are additionally grateful to J.-A.Arnéodo, D.Breillat, H. and J.Chuquet, A.Gardrat, B.Hughes, T.Lyne, Y.Madiot, M.Paillard, M.-C.Smouts, C.Verley, and P.Wass. Valerie Andrews was a marvel of efficiency and helpfulness in producing the final typescript. As always, there were many others, too numerous to mention, who helped in many different ways; our thanks are offered to them also. Responsibility for errors remains of course with us. The authors and publishers are grateful to the following for permission to reproduce copyright material: the French Embassy, London, for Fig. 5.2; Librairie Armand Colin for Table 1.1; Le Nouvel Observateur for Table 2.8; La Documentation française for Tables 2.9 and 2.10; OECD for Table 2.11; Professor Thompson and Butterworths for Table 2.13; Hodder & Stoughton Ltd for Table 2.14.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences
    Codebook InDivEU – party preferences European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies December 2020 Introduction The “InDivEU – party preferences” dataset provides data on the positions of more than 400 parties from 28 countries1 on questions of (differentiated) European integration. The dataset comprises a selection of party positions taken from two existing datasets: (1) The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File contains party positions for three rounds of European Parliament elections (2009, 2014, and 2019). Party positions were determined in an iterative process of party self-placement and expert judgement. For more information: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/65944 (2) The Chapel Hill Expert Survey The Chapel Hill Expert Survey contains party positions for the national elections most closely corresponding the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014, 2019. Party positions were determined by expert judgement. For more information: https://www.chesdata.eu/ Three additional party positions, related to DI-specific questions, are included in the dataset. These positions were determined by experts involved in the 2019 edition of euandi after the elections took place. The inclusion of party positions in the “InDivEU – party preferences” is limited to the following issues: - General questions about the EU - Questions about EU policy - Questions about differentiated integration - Questions about party ideology 1 This includes all 27 member states of the European Union in 2020, plus the United Kingdom. How to Cite When using the ‘InDivEU – Party Preferences’ dataset, please cite all of the following three articles: 1. Reiljan, Andres, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Lorenzo Cicchi, Diego Garzia, Alexander H.
    [Show full text]
  • Prezentace Aplikace Powerpoint
    Current French Politics A brief quiz to warm ourselves up: Who is this person? Presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy 2007- 2012 • Sarkozy – minister of interior 2002- 2004 and 2005-2007 (civil unrests 2005) • Anti-immigration and securitization rhetoric in the campaign and in office • Crisis of the Eurozone and French- German Leadership (‘Merkozy’) • Economics of state interventionism (dirigisme) • British and French operation in Libya 2011 turning down Kaddafi’ s regime • Prime minister François Fillon Presidential elections 2012 • Main candidates: • François Hollande (28.6 per cent in the 1st round; 51/6 in the 2nd round) • Nicolas Sarkozy (27.2 / 48.4) • Marine Le Pen (17.9) • Jean-Luc Mélenchon (11.1) • François Bayrou (9.1) Parliamentary elections 2012 Presidency of François Hollande • First secretary of PS 1997-2008 • Law on marriage of same-sex couples (2013) • Unpopular labour reform 2013 (Kurzarbeit) • January and November 2015 Paris and 2016 Nice terrorist acts • Economical and social difficulties • The least popular President of the 5th Republic • Prime ministers: • Jean-Marc Ayrault (2012-2014) • Manuel Valls (2014-2016) • Bernard Cazeneuve (2016-2017) The European Parliament elections 2014 Presidential elections 2017 • Main candidates: • Emmanuel Macron (24.0 / 66.1) • Marine Le Pen (21.3 / 33.9) • François Fillon (20.0) • Jean-Luc Mélenchon (19.6) • Benoît Hamon (6.4) Parliamentary elections 2017 • Effects of the electoral system: • http://www.parties-and-elections.eu/france.html Presidency of Emmanuel Macron • Graduated from ENA
    [Show full text]
  • The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe by Kimberly Ann Twist a Dissertation Submitted In
    The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe by Kimberly Ann Twist A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Jonah D. Levy, Chair Professor Jason Wittenberg Professor Jacob Citrin Professor Katerina Linos Spring 2015 The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe Copyright 2015 by Kimberly Ann Twist Abstract The Mainstream Right, the Far Right, and Coalition Formation in Western Europe by Kimberly Ann Twist Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Jonah D. Levy, Chair As long as far-right parties { known chiefly for their vehement opposition to immigration { have competed in contemporary Western Europe, scholars and observers have been concerned about these parties' implications for liberal democracy. Many originally believed that far- right parties would fade away due to a lack of voter support and their isolation by mainstream parties. Since 1994, however, far-right parties have been included in 17 governing coalitions across Western Europe. What explains the switch from exclusion to inclusion in Europe, and what drives mainstream-right parties' decisions to include or exclude the far right from coalitions today? My argument is centered on the cost of far-right exclusion, in terms of both office and policy goals for the mainstream right. I argue, first, that the major mainstream parties of Western Europe initially maintained the exclusion of the far right because it was relatively costless: They could govern and achieve policy goals without the far right.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Leadership in France: from Charles De Gaulle to Nicolas Sarkozy
    Political Leadership In France: From Charles De Gaulle To Nicolas Sarkozy John Gaffney Total number of pages (including bibliography): 440 To the memory of my mother and father ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements List of abbreviations Introduction Chapter 1: 1958: The Gaullist Settlement and French Politics The Elements of the New Republic in 1958 The Birth of the New Republic Understanding the New Republic The Characteristics of the New Republic Chapter 2: 1958-1968: The Consolidation and Evolution of the Fifth Republic The 1962 Referendum and Elections Gaullism and the Gaullists De Gaulle on the World Stage Left Opposition The New Conditions of the Republic Gaullism and Government De Gaulle The Left 1965-1967 Chapter 3: 1968 and its Aftermath Sous les Pavés, la Cinquième République ‘Opinion’ The unmediated relationship escapes to the streets Personal Leadership (and its rejection) iii Chapter 4: 1969-1974: Gaullism Without de Gaulle The 1969 Referendum The 1969 Presidential Election The Pompidou Presidency: 1969-1974 Pompidou and the Institutions Pompidou and Foreign Affairs Left Opposition, 1969-1974 Chapter 5: 1974-1981: The Giscard Years The 1974 Elections Slowing Down the ‘Marseillaise’ Then Speeding It Up Again Giscard and his Presidency Gaullism and Giscardianism The Left 1978-1981 Chapter 6: 1981-1988: From the République Sociale to the République Française The 1981 Elections The 1986 Election 1986-1988 Chapter 7: 1988-2002: The Long Decade of Vindictiveness, Miscalculations, Defeat, Farce, Good Luck, Good Government, and Catastrophe. The Presidency Right or Wrong. 1988-1993: System Dysfunction and Occasional Chaos Rocard Cresson Bérégovoy 1993-1995: Balladur. Almost President 1995-1997: Balladur out, Chirac in; Jospin up, Chirac down: Politics as Farce 1997-2002: The Eternal Cohabitation.
    [Show full text]
  • Dataset of Electoral Volatility in the European Parliament Elections Since 1979 Codebook (July 31, 2019)
    Dataset of Electoral Volatility in the European Parliament elections since 1979 Vincenzo Emanuele (Luiss), Davide Angelucci (Luiss), Bruno Marino (Unitelma Sapienza), Leonardo Puleo (Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna), Federico Vegetti (University of Milan) Codebook (July 31, 2019) Description This dataset provides data on electoral volatility and its internal components in the elections for the European Parliament (EP) in all European Union (EU) countries since 1979 or the date of their accession to the Union. It also provides data about electoral volatility for both the class bloc and the demarcation bloc. This dataset will be regularly updated so as to include the next rounds of the European Parliament elections. Content Country: country where the EP election is held (in alphabetical order) Election_year: year in which the election is held Election_date: exact date of the election RegV: electoral volatility caused by vote switching between parties that enter or exit from the party system. A party is considered as entering the party system where it receives at least 1% of the national share in election at time t+1 (while it received less than 1% in election at time t). Conversely, a party is considered as exiting the part system where it receives less than 1% in election at time t+1 (while it received at least 1% in election at time t). AltV: electoral volatility caused by vote switching between existing parties, namely parties receiving at least 1% of the national share in both elections under scrutiny. OthV: electoral volatility caused by vote switching between parties falling below 1% of the national share in both the elections at time t and t+1.
    [Show full text]
  • Who's Afraid of the Imperative Mandate?
    Who’s Afraid of the Imperative Mandate? Massimiliano Tomba University of California, Santa Cruz The imperative mandate is generally awkward to Western democracies. — European Commission for Democracy through Law1 The imperative mandate is a political system, dating back to the Middle Ages, in which representatives enact policies in accordance with mandates and can be recalled by people’s assemblies. The imperative mandate is expressed in a context in which power is not monopolized by the state, but distributed in a plurality of municipalities and assemblies with specific political authority. This system, based on the plurality of the authority of the assemblies, is incompatible with the modern state as it was theoretically celebrated by Thomas Hobbes and historically born through the process of concentration of power introduced by absolute monarchies and constitutionally perfected by the French Revolution.2 Article 52 of the French Constitution of 1795 expressly introduced the ban on the mandate: “The members of the Legislative Body are not the representatives of the department which has selected them, but of the entire nation. No mandate can be given to them.” In their 2009 Report on the Imperative Mandate and Similar Practices, the European Commission for Democracy through Law, better known as the Venice Commission, asserted the incompatibility of the imperative mandate with the “European tradition of the free mandate of parliamentarians.”3 The Commission concluded that the prohibition of imperative mandates “must prevail as a cornerstone of European democratic constitutionalism.”4 I consider the imperative mandate not as a model to be replicated, but as an institution that can point to an alternative political trajectory, one that is, indeed, “generally awkward to Western democracies.” In fact, the imperative mandate is awkward only in reference to the dominant trajectory of political modernity, characterized by representative democracy and the state’s monopoly on power.
    [Show full text]
  • France Comparative Politics Test Review Mr
    FRANCE COMPARATIVE POLITICS TEST REVIEW MR. BAYSDELL 1. The current Prim Minister of France is Francois Fillon. 2. The current President of France is Nicolas Sarzoky. 3. The French President is elected by a direct popular vote. 4. French Parliamentarians may simultaneously hold various regional political offices. 5. France does not posses a permanent seat without veto power on the United Nations Security Council. 6. The Constitutional Council can declare laws in France unconstitutional. 7. A Traditional element of stability in the French Government has been the bureaucracy. 8. A major constitutional innovation of the French Fifth Republic was a strong local governmental structure. 9. Since 1989 the French government wants European integration to proceed faster than does the British government. 10. The principle that basic economic conditions determine political structures underlies Marxism. 11. The French political party that has advanced its political agenda by capitalizing on the racial intolerance accompanying the influx of immigrants is the National Front. 12. The European Union (EU) challenges the sovereignty of member states in Europe because an increasing number of decisions are now being made by the EU instead of being made solely by national government. 13. The right to call referenda most enhances the powers of the French President. 14. In France the national legislature consists of a directly elected National Assembly and an indirectly elected Senate. 15. Unlike their British counterparts, when French Representatives in Parliament are named to cabinet posts they must give up their seats in Parliament. 16. One reason the French Communist Party (FCP) lost support during the 1980s and 1990s was that the Socialist Party was able to attract many voters who in the past had supported the FCP.
    [Show full text]
  • Dissertation Final Draft
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Political Thought and Political Action: Michael Walzer's Engagement with American Radicalism Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4x10110b Author Reiner, Jason Toby David Publication Date 2011 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Political Thought and Political Action: Michael Walzer’s Engagement with American Radicalism By Jason Toby David Reiner A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Mark Bevir, Chair Professor Shannon Stimson Professor Sarah Song Professor David Hollinger Spring 2011 Abstract Political Thought and Political Action: Michael Walzer’s Engagement with American Radicalism by Jason Toby David Reiner Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Mark Bevir, Chair This dissertation provides an account of the historical development of the political thought of Michael Walzer from the 1950s to the present day. It situates Walzer within an American tradition of social democratic thought and argues that only when he is so situated can his thought be understood fully. Walzer’s engagement with that tradition, most notably through his work on Dissent magazine, has structured how he has responded to many of the major developments in political life over the course of his career, including the decline of movement politics, the rise of neoliberalism, the recent waves of immigration to the USA, and the increased salience of civil society following the demise of the Soviet Union.
    [Show full text]
  • The French Party System Forms a Benchmark Study of the State of Party Politics in France
    evans cover 5/2/03 2:37 PM Page 1 THE FRENCH PARTY SYSTEM THE FRENCHPARTY This book provides a complete overview of political parties in France. The social and ideological profiles of all the major parties are analysed chapter by chapter, highlighting their principal functions and dynamics within the system. This examination is THE complemented by analyses of bloc and system features, including the pluralist left, Europe, and the ideological space in which the parties operate. In particular, the book addresses the impressive FRENCH capacity of French parties and their leaders to adapt themselves to the changing concerns of their electorates and to a shifting PARTY institutional context. Contrary to the apparently fragmentary system and increasingly hostile clashes between political personalities, the continuities in the French political system seem SYSTEM destined to persist. Drawing on the expertise of its French and British contributors, The French party system forms a benchmark study of the state of party politics in France. It will be an essential text for all students of Edited by French politics and parties, and of interest to students of European Evans Jocelyn Evans politics more generally. ed. Jocelyn Evans is Lecturer in Politics at the University of Salford The French party system The French party system edited by Jocelyn A. J. Evans Manchester University Press Manchester and New York distributed exclusively in the USA by Palgrave Copyright © Manchester University Press 2003 While copyright in the volume as a whole is vested in Manchester University Press, copyright in individual chapters belongs to their respective authors. This electronic version has been made freely available under a Creative Commons (CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, which permits non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction provided the author(s) and Manchester University Press are fully cited and no modifications or adaptations are made.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative and Mainstream Media Coverage of Drone Strikes
    KILLING IN SILENCE: ALTERNATIVE AND MAINSTREAM MEDIA COVERAGE OF DRONE STRIKES Brion White A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2015 Committee: Joshua Atkinson, Advisor Cynthia A. Hendricks, Graduate Faculty Representative Clayton Rosati Oliver Boyd Barrett ii ABSTRACT Joshua Atkinson, Advisor This dissertation focuses on the media coverage of U.S. drone strikes by both mainstream and alternative media sources. Chapter 1 introduces some background on alternative media and drone strikes and introduces the main points of the project. Chapter gives an extended literature review of ideology, media and power and alternative media to establish the parameters of the study and establish previous work on similar topics. Chapter 3 establishes both the method and methodology of the study, including why I conducted the study I did and how I processed the information from both mainstream and alternative media. Chapter 4 includes the results from both the mainstream media and alternative media texts I used in this study. Finally, Chapter 5 reviews my contributions to the literature along with future research based on the findings of this study. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................. 23 Ideology....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • De Gaulle and Europe
    De Gaulle and Europe: Historical Revision and Social Science Theory by Andrew Moravcsik• Harvard University Program for the Study of Germany and Europe Working Paper Series 8.5 Abstract The thousands of books and articles on Charles de Gaulle's policy toward European integration, wheth­ er written by historians, social scientists, or commentators, universally accord primary explanatory importance to the General's distinctive geopolitical ideology. In explaining his motivations, only sec­ ondary significance, if any at all, is attached to commercial considerations. This paper seeks to re· verse this historiographical consensus by examining the four major decisions toward European integra­ tion during de Gaulle's presidency: the decisions to remain in the Common Market in 1958, to propose the Foucher Plan in the early 1960s, to veto British accession to the EC, and to provoke the "empty chair" crisis in 1965-1966, resulting in the "Luxembourg Compromise." In each case, the overwhelm­ ing bulk of the primary evidence-speeches, memoirs, or government documents-suggests that de Gaulle's primary motivation was economic, not geopolitical or ideological. Like his predecessors and successors, de Gaulle sought to promote French industry and agriculture by establishing protected mar­ kets for their export products. This empirical finding has three broader implications: (1) For those in· teresred in the European Union, it suggests that regional integration has been driven primarily by economic, not geopolitical considerations--even in the "least likely" case. (2) For those interested in the role of ideas in foreign policy, it suggests that strong interest groups in a democracy limit the im· pact of a leader's geopolitical ideology--even where the executive has very broad institutional autono­ my.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Gaullist Movement to the President's Party
    8 From the Gaullist movement to the president’s party Andrew Knapp The right From the Gaullist movement to the president’s party Introduction Most major European countries are content with just one major party of the centre-right: Britain’s Conservatives, Spain’s PPE, Germany’s CDU–CSU. France has always had at least two. The electoral cycle of April–June 2002, however, held out the prospect of change by transform- ing the fortunes of France’s centre-right in two ways. A double victory at the presidential and parliamentary elections kept Jacques Chirac in the Elysée and put a large centre-right majority into the National Assembly. Second, most of the hitherto dispersed centre-right family merged into a single formation, the UMP. Why did this merger happen in 2002, and not sooner? The first part of this chapter will consider what kept the mainstream right apart before 2002. The second section will show why the parties had less reason to stay apart by 2002 than they had had five, ten or twenty years earlier. The third will show how a more favourable context was used to advance a concrete merger project, in the approach to and aftermath of the 2002 elections. The conclusion will assess both the UMP’s longer-term prospects, and its more general impact on the French party system. France’s divided right For most of the Fifth Republic, three things have divided the French right: real differences of ideology and policy; opposed organisational cultures; and the logic of presidential competition. On the other hand, although the right-wing electorate is far from homogeneous, divisions among voters had rather little impact on divisions between the parties – and voter demand was eventually to be important in the genesis of a merged party.
    [Show full text]