|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: France
After the March 10 demonstrations
France: Chirac government, Socialist Party close ranks on
European constitutional referendum
By Richard Dufour
19 March 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Popular anger at the policy of social demolition carried out
by the ultraconservative government of Jacques Chirac overflowed
into the streets of France last weekfor the third time since
the beginning of the year, following two days of mass protest
January 20 and February 5.
At the beginning of the week, tens of thousands of high school
students marched in more than 150 cities against the lengthening
of the work week. Then on March 10, nearly a million people demonstrated
throughout the country150,000 in Parisagainst the
assault by the government and employers on working conditions,
wages, jobs and living standards.
The marches brought together teachers and high school students,
public servants, researchers, workers from the public utility
company Électricité et Gaz de France (EDF-GDF) and
numerous delegations from the private sector, with banners from
Lidl and Alcatel in Marseilles, EADS, Latécoère
and Carrefour in Toulouse, Legrand in Limoges and RVI in Lyons,
to name only a few.
Thousands of strikes were reported, notably at Coca-Cola, Exxon,
LOréal, LU, Michelin, Nestlé, Renault, Rhodia,
Rhône-Poulenc, Sanofi-Aventis, Total and Yoplait. Metalworkers
were also strongly in evidence on the demonstrations.
Some 15 percent of postal workers, 24 percent at France Telecom
and 22 percent at EDF-GDF, stopped work for the day, according
to management reports. In the public service, 36 percent of workers
were on strike, and in national education, 40 percent. Transportation
was also strongly affected: the railways, the Paris suburban lines,
the Paris Metro and bus system, and the ports and airports.
This day of widespread action demonstrates once again the willingness
of French workers to fight the socioeconomic policy that benefits
only the ruling elite. Unemployment has risen above 10 percent
for the first time in five years, while the three biggest banksCrédit
agricole, BNP Paribas and Société généraleare
making record profits of nearly 10 billion euros ($13.3 billion).
Such is the profound inequality tearing apart society in France,
as everywhere else.
But the official leadership of the workers is doing everything
in its power to prevent the necessary political conclusions from
being drawn: namely, the necessity to reorganise society on a
new basis, where the needs of the majority come before the accumulation
of profit by a minority that owns everything.
The demands on March 10 were limited by the union leaderships
to a mere slowing down of the brutal assault by the big enterprises
on the social position of workers, without ever calling into question
the pro-big-business policy of the whole government, and of the
profit system itself.
For the general secretary of the CGT union confederation, Bernard
Thibault, last weeks actions underline the level of
discontent and also the urgent need for a concrete response to
the demands over working time and buying power. According
to the general secretary of the Force Ouvrière union, Jean-Claude
Mailly, the mobilisation shows that demands over wages,
in particular, are broadly supported and are a priority with many,
so the government must listen and the employers must say something.
As for the public service unions, they let it be known that an
additional wage increase of 0.7 percentthe equivalent of
550 million euros ($736 million)on top of the 1 percent
granted for 2005, would make it possible to get beyond a
situation of conflict, renew the social dialogue and show the
employees that they have been heard.
As always on these occasions, it fell to the self-styled extreme
left to provide a political cover for this sabotage by calling
on workers to limit themselves to pressuring their leaderships.
So that March 10 will not be a one-time event but a stage,
the point of departure for bigger demonstrations, wrote
Arlette Laguiller in the March 11 issue of Lutte Ouvrière,
the union leaderships must feel that the workers will no
longer accept their shilly-shallying and stalling.
The media speculated about a possible retreat by the governmentimperceptible,
it must be said. According to a front-page article in the influential
Le Monde, one day after the big demonstrations,
the presidents office gave instructions to add 1 percent
to the tiny wages offer for the public servants already on the
table.
Although the assistant minister for the budget, Jean-François
Copé, subsequently reaffirmed that the situation
with public finances demands the greatest vigilance, it
is not impossible that the government might depart from the hard
line it took in 2003 in the face of a movement as broad as this
one and opt for a slight tactical retreat.
The reasons justifying this approach were spelled out in an
editorial in Le Monde. Its starting point is that the
government is fortunate that the unions protesting are responsible
and that they completely mastered the social discontent
by holding a day of multi-sector actions, which they can control
better than spontaneous and wildcat strikes.
With such support, the editorial concludes, two and a half
months away from an important referendum, on the European constitution,
Mr. Chirac must not remain completely insensitive to the social
demands.
The fears expressed by this perspicacious mouthpiece of the
French ruling class are far from exaggerated. If the social discontent
manifested so massively March 10 met up with a conscious anti-capitalist
opposition, that would indeed pose a grave danger to the ruling
elite. It might indicate that French workers were beginning to
realise that the defence of their immediate economic interests
is incompatible with the whole political order in Europe, and
that they must consequently build their own mass political party
in opposition to all the parties of big business, including the
official left of the Socialist Party (PS) and its junior partners,
the French Communist Party (PCF) and the Greens.
The referendum campaign is also very instructive in this regard,
beginning with the manner in which it was officially launched.
Afraid of appearing to be forcing the constitutional treaty down
the throats of a hostile population, Chirac rebuffed the advocates
of a lightning campaign, setting the referendum for May 29, a
campaign of 85 days. Nor did Chirac appear on television to solemnly
notify the French people that he was asking for their vote, explain
why and tell them that he expected a positive response from them.
As the campaign has unfolded so far, the majority of the effort
for the yes vote is being made by the Socialist Party
establishment, with its first secretary, François Hollande,
leading the charge. His arguments amount to an open and shameless
falsification of the European constitutional treaty, which will
be put to a vote in the referendum. All citizens will have
the same social rights, claims Hollande, without batting
an eyelid. For the first time, the constitution recognises
the public service, he repeats ad nauseam.
It is common knowledge, however, that the treaty has been drawn
up expressly to minimise the social and environmental restraints
on big European capital. Speaking, for example, of the promotion
of jobs and the improvement of the conditions of life and work,
the treaty adds that such a development will be the result above
all of the functioning of the internal market that will
facilitate the harmonisation of the social systems.
The leader of the Socialist Party makes no attempt even to
distance himself from the campaign for a yes vote
being led by the UMP (Union pour un movement populaire), the main
party of the right wing, currently in power. It was about
time the UMP came out openly in favor of the European constitution!
Hollande exclaimed recentlyproviding a glimpse of the consensus
among the French ruling elite around the plan for a stronger
capitalist Europe, which it has been spearheading, together with
its German partner.
This is a repeat of what happened during the second round of
the presidential election in 2002, when the Socialist Partywith
the blessing of the so-called extreme left parties
such as the Ligue communiste révolutionnaire (LCR)recommended
a republican vote for the ultraconservative and racist
Jacques Chirac, under the pretext of barring the way
to Le Pen, the head of the neofascist National Front.
It is worth noting that Hollandes positions earned him
catcalls and a few snowballs during a demonstration of several
thousand to defend the public service last Saturday
in Guéret, in central France. The protest was organised
by the Socialist Party federation in the area, sympathetic to
a minority tendency within the party that advocates a no
vote in the referendum. All the leading lights of the left were
there, including the national secretary of the Communist Party,
Marie-George Buffet, and the spokesperson of the LCR, Olivier
Besancenot.
The immediate reaction of the Socialist Party establishment
was to launch a campaign of threats against those who dont
respect the vote of the membership, referring to
an internal vote held December 1, where 60 percent of the members
supported a yes vote for the European constitution.
But the real aim of the campaign is to intimidate popular opposition
to the treaty and to prevent it from taking a politically coherent
and progressive form.
On this basic question, Hollande is joined by his critics within
the official campaign for the no votebe
it the minority within the Socialist Party or the Communist Party.
For while Hollande denies all connection between the European
constitution and the neoliberal offensive of privatisations, the
transfer of production facilities and massive cuts in social security,
the advocates of the no vote remain silent on the
profound connection between neo-liberalism and capitalism. In
the final analysis, both work to prevent the emergence of a progressive
opposition, that is, socialist and internationalist, to capitalist
Europe.
The leader of the Communist Party declares, for example: The
referendum will be the opportunity to say that we want no more
of the liberal [free-market] policies of the government.
But she carefully neglects to mention the fact that the assault
on the public service didnt begin with the European constitution;
that the constitution only legalises and institutionalises a process
that is already well advanced, driven by the profound economic
transformation associated with the globalisation of production;
and that this globalisation contains a powerful potential for
social and human progress, on condition that it is freed from
the anarchic control of the market and serves the common good.
The advocates of the no vote within the Socialist
Party are also motivated by pragmatic electoral considerations;
the fear that if they associate themselves openly with the right
in power in the context of the campaign for a yes
vote, their party will end up losing its last bit of political
credibility in the eyes of the popular masses, two years before
the next national elections.
This was openly expressed by the two most visible leaders in
the Socialist Party minority. When launching his campaign, the
deputy for Landes (southwest France), Henri Emmanuelli, explained:
If it wins, the yes vote will not be 70 percent,
it will be 50-something. Then the link will have to be reforged.
And the senator for Essonne (Paris region), Jean-Luc Mélenchon,
warned: The referendum campaign must not become a pretext
for digging an unbridgeable gulf.
See Also:
French referendum on European constitution
set for May 29
[18 March 2005]
Vote no in Spanish
referendum on European Union constitution: Statement of the Socialist
Equality Party (Britain) / Partei für Soziale Gleichheit
(Germany)
[19 February 2005]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |