, modified at
10:01 am, January 12, 2022
On Europe Matin Wednesday, the historian and philosopher Marcel Gauchet estimated at less than 100 days of the presidential election that the five-year term of Emmanuel Macron is “a failure”. According to him, France is “at the same point as in 2017”, and the Head of State will have difficulty replaying the card of “great ambition” for 2022.
Less than 100 days before the presidential election, Emmanuel Macron has still not officially declared himself a candidate for a second term. Guest on Europe Matin Wednesday, Marcel Gauchet, historian and philosopher, estimated that the five-year term of the Head of State is “a failure”.
“Failure is only judged against an initial intention. Emmanuel Macron was elected by bursting into a political game by declaring the impotence of this system of right-left alternation which seemed exhausted. He promised a new impetus for France, a remedy for this French misfortune and what remains on arrival? A failure because the program that was announced to us and whose keystone was the refoundation of Europe, is revealed to almost unfulfilled in all its dimensions. “
Macron “capitalized on the crises”
According to him, we are “at the same point as in 2017”. “Perhaps he will replay the great ambition for us, but he will have a hard time because he has rather become the candidate of the order and not of the movement as he was in 2017. It is an astonishing metamorphosis because there are failures that can be electoral successes, ”he continued.
Marcel Gauchet still considered that the Head of State “capitalized on the crises” which shook him. “He had a very difficult game to play and far from this game turning against him, finally he came out with a base of popularity and electoral strength stronger than anything one could expect, and certainly stronger than in 2017, “said the historian. “The yellow vests, even if he struggled to extricate himself from them, that made him the candidate for social order. The Covid, it was providence for him. Or the controversy over pension reform , which was very badly committed to his government, nobody talks about it any more. And thanks to ‘whatever the cost’ he acquired the image of a generous social democracy and this crisis went without breakage for a large part of the population. “