This also demonstrates the presence of a great unhappiness, a great concern about the future and an expectation of instability in that country. In addition it illustrates that great importance is attributed to the office of president. Apparently French electors think that the current situation of the country will radically change, simply because there is a new president. This point of view totally neglects the other elements in the political mechanism. In other words the French electors have showed that they are acting as this was an American election. The majority of the French voters have preferred republican values to democratic ones, and they have emphasized security more than civil freedoms. In their choice fear has played a more important role than expectations, and national interests were more important than universal values. In this case the “citizen” has replaced the “individual,” and the “motherland” overshadowed the “globe.” This election proves the expectation of a “powerful France” and a will for power politics. But there are some problems with this picture. First of all, Nicolas Sarkozy’s reference point as regards the power politics is the US, but the latter is about to modify its attitude, as the parliament has been taken over by Democrats, who don’t think in the same manner as the Republicans. France appears to follow the global tendencies with a delay. But if Sarkozy thinks that the Democrats will follow multilateral policies and will facilitate France’s will to become a better partner, this could create some paradoxes with the rhetoric of “France’s interests” and “Frenchness.” By the way, it will be difficult to convince French people to develop a closer partnership with the US after all these speeches on patriotism and nationalism.
The second issue is about the economic model. Many experts are saying that France’s socio-economical problems originate from “public liberalism.” Historical and sociological processes have forged a conservative nation, and the election results reflect this fact. Any radical change in France will be criticized, not only by the new middle class, workers, youth or suburban population, but the whole nation. There are some people who are expecting France to become something like Britain, but the social background of these countries are completely different, so this seems very hard.
The third point is about the socialists, who have decided at the very moment of the declaration of the results to pursue the fight. They have given this signal by organizing street parties even after the announcement of their defeat. Sarkozy’s victory is also the socialists defeat. The socialists couldn’t renovate themselves, they are split up into fractions and Ségolène Royal couldn’t represent them as well as they expected. One televised debate can’t play a decisive role in the electors’ choice, but her aggressive attitude and “me” position, instead of the traditional “we” position of the leftist movement, have caused a lot of regrets. Maybe Sarkozy’s victory will serve to benefit French socialists after all.
Almost everything is known about Sarkozy. He wants change and he thinks that France will lose its international position without this change. But he has many contradictions in his perceptions of the international environment. The results of the votes in the foreign voting stations are a good indicator of this. We should consider why French voters in the US and Israel have chosen Sarkozy, but those in Latin America or in Turkey voted massively for Royal.
