The world at a dangerous turning point

The world is in a deep systemic crisis: That of globalization. Some of the essential mechanisms of human society have gone global, like capital, information and free circulation of goods. Some other no-less essential dynamics have not gone global, like market regulations, security issues and environmental protection. This very uneven globalization has created an immense feeling of anxiety and despair among the populations of the world, all around the world. Conventional politics are not providing the requisite confidence at a time when classic nation-state parameters are challenged daily.

Terrorism has gone global, feeding on structural discrepancies and inequalities in developed nations. The necessary international cooperation to efficiently fight terror is sorely missing. International organizations have not been designed to contain this kind of global threat. Therefore, the populations in diverse developed countries have also lost their confidence in the efficiency and functioning of international organizations. This does not bode well at all.

A preliminary reaction, in such cases, is usually an attempt to isolate oneself from the "external" world. This opens the gate to different isolationist movements and the far-right finds fertile ground to prosper and to be heard. The far-right is usually short on ideas but big on slogans. It badly needs a scapegoat and has no difficulties in finding one. The stereotype is obviously the "international Jewish conspiracy" denounced and fought by Adolf Hitler and his Doberman gang. Nothing had happened in the 20th century German society that warned anyone about a horrendous flood of anti-Semitism. But it happened. There has never been any "Jewish conspiracy" at all, nationally or internationally, but this did not prevent the slaughtering of 6 million Jews and World War II, where around 60 million people lost their lives.

France, as I analyzed in my previous article, is in the midst of psychological turmoil. Around 90 percent of the French believe that their country is on the wrong track. According to a poll published by the Economist, France has the most pessimistic society in the world regarding the future of their country. The world's average is also eloquent: Almost 60 percent of the world's population think their country is on the wrong track (Turkey is much better than most of the other countries, with a slight majority thinking they are on the wrong track).

The Chinese think very optimistically of their future, so do the Saudis and Indians. But the French are the worst, followed closely by the Mexicans and Brazilians. We saw the first tangible consequence deep pessimism and rejection of conventional politics during the second round of conservative primaries in France last Sunday. Out of the two contenders, the one largely given as a winner in late August, Alain Jupp

é, a perfect profile for a president, lost the election. More than two-thirds of voters have chosen François Fillon. A totally unexpected outsider, whose main argument has been to offer a very strict liberal program in France.

Fillon is the exact opposite of Nicolas Sarkozy, under whom he served as a low-profile premier for five years. He is very polite and not exuberant in his political or personal life. His wife, Penelope Clark Fillon, is a socially invisible Welsh-turned-French lawyer, they met during their law studies at university and got married. Their children are also perfectly anonymous citizens. These are the antidotes to Nicolas Sarkozy, his marriages, his whiz kids and his "bling bling" lifestyle.

Concerning the policies Fillon wants to implement, he has a very important conservative and ultra-liberal program. He says things in a very polite, conventionally French way but the things he underlines do not bode very well for the future of a society anxious for its culture, its traditions and way of living. He mostly underlines the "dignity" of the job. A French president should behave himself, he says openly that under François Hollande, the dignity of the presidency has been badly damaged (probably because of the love-life issues of the latter with his companion, Valrie Trierweiler).In May 2017, France will have to vote for its president. Nobody knows what the results of the first round will be. Will the fascistic party Front National's leader, Marine Le Pen arrive first? Or will we see a duel between the right-wing candidate (François Fillon) and a champion from the left? Maybe Manuel Valls, the actual premier. Will Hollande risk his political career by aspiring for a second election, which remains a very distant probability? Anyhow, France has chosen to defy "conventional" policy-making. It will definitely not be Le Pen elected in the second round, God forbid, but very likely a conservative candidate with a deep liberal restructuring program. It is reminiscent of the election of François Mitterrand in 1981, after 23 years of right-wing presidencies. He was elected on a very deep socialist restructuring program supported by the then all-powerful French Communist Party. He tried to implement his program two years in a row, with very mitigated results, then he opted for "governing at the center." Will history repeat itself?