Sarkozy vs. Royal

The upcoming French presidential election, which will pit Socialist candidate Segolene Royal against Conservative Nicolas Sarkozy, is shaping up to be a very interesting contest between the socialist status quo (as defended by Royal) and the more right-wing neoliberal reformism of Sarkozy. Unlike the last French presidential election, in which two right-wing candidates (Jacques Chirac and Jean-Marie Le Pen) made it to the last round, this year's election results could swing the troubled nation in two very different directions.

Arguably the two primary issues in the election involve France's economic and social situation. France's economy has been stagnant for some time now, with high unemployment and slow growth. Sarkozy claims that these economic problems are caused by France's extensive socialist economic programs, such as the 35-hour work week, high minimum wage laws, welfare-state programs, and strong unions. Sarkozy aims to liberalize the French economy and spur economic growth by removing restrictions on labor, lowering taxes and decreasing state economic interventionism.

On the other hand, Royal seeks essentially to maintain and expand the current pro-labor, pro-regulation and socialist programs that Sarkozy claims are weighing down the economy. Royal's proposed reforms include attempts to stimulate demand through minimum wage increases and expansion of government assistance programs.

Closely tied to these economic issues is the volatile social situation in France, which has turned explosive more than once in the recent past. The nation's poverty-stricken banlieues -- poor, largely immigrant-populated suburbs of major French cities -- are home to high unemployment, high crime rates, social and religious tension, and a number of other modern urban social and economic plagues. Royal, who is largely pro-immigrant, would seek to pacify these neighborhoods with the above-mentioned economic reforms, and has emphasized tolerance along with the need for law and order.

Sarkozy, on the other hand, has taken a much harder line against immigration, and has promised a strong response to the "scum" of the banlieues. He seeks to economically eliminate the unemployment and poverty that produces delinquency and criminal behavior through free-market reforms, while concurrently emphasizing strong police action and forceful response to criminality and rioting.

Generally speaking, the choice being presented to the French people is not unlike that so common in American elections -- it is between the paternal and maternal systems of government. In another sense, however, the picture is opposite that in America, where liberal Democrats have struggled to win support for more socialist programs. In France, vast socialist programs and high tax rates are the norm, while conservative reformers are struggling to dismantle this system, which they view as a weight on the economy. As has been noted by other commentators, Royal (as the defender of the existing system) is the real "conservative" in this race, while Sarkozy presents a new alternative to the established leftist systems.

While Sarkozy's economic programs are certainly preferable to any libertarian, his paternalism and tough-guy stance could mean trouble for civil rights and be dangerous in the foreign policy arena. Furthermore, Sarkozy's anti-immigrant rhetoric -- which has appealed to supporters of far-right Le Pen -- could be troubling to some libertarians. Sadly, neither candidate has shown a strong commitment to liberty. Whether it is Sarkozy's militarism and police-statism or Royal's mommy-knows-best socialism, the French people are left without a truly pro-freedom candidate. Furthermore, Sarkozy's promises to shrink government and lower taxes should be taken with a grain of salt -- such promises are rarely kept, and the state is notoriously hard to shrink.

Once again, this unfortunate lack of representation of libertarian ideas -- and the limited choice between welfare and warfare statism -- should be recognizable to American libertarians.