Since the collapse of the major historical political parties, which coincided with Emmanuel Macron’s election in 2017, French political life has become increasingly fragmented and extreme. The centre has successively acted as a third way and then as a repellent. This fragmentation is accompanied by a renewal whose originality lies more in the names of the parties/movements than in their programs. These programs show how ideas and the convictions associated with them hardly change; they tend to shift on the political spectrum, blurring the boundaries between political sensibilities. In such a context, many French people are considering giving a majority to the far right or, conversely, to a popular front dominated by the far left. The term far might be surprising here because the normalization of both ends has eroded historical landmarks.
This situation, in my opinion, results from the conjunction of idealizations, oppositions, and technical progress. Beyond the type of political regime that is democracy, the French have a certain idea of their country, which is shaped by its history and the dominance it has had in the past and continues to have to a lesser extent in political, economic, or cultural spheres. The fear of foreigners is thus associated with an ideal of France, its place in the world, and also a way of life, particularly based on owning a house and an individual vehicle, which was greatly developed during the post-war economic boom known as the Trente Glorieuses. However, this ideal has since clashed with the competition from countries once described as « underdeveloped, » then « emerging, » then « developing, » and now have become competitors, for some, political enemies.
The international competition, stemming from the democratic value of equality, is the very force that, in turn, threatens democracy. It promotes rapid computerization and automation, which lead to the gradual replacement of human beings in many economic activities. This replacement seems underestimated to me and raises the question of the role of humankind in a world where intelligence no longer needs to be recreated with each generation, can develop without the help of individuals and society, encompass most knowledge, or operate mechanical elements. Certainly, artificial intelligence still has a long way to go, but each of the points mentioned is already a reality, and with current advancements, these questions are likely to become pressing in the coming decades.
Technological advancements necessitate the renewal of professions, which tend to concentrate on designing automated solutions, while the field of execution is gradually becoming dehumanized. Personally, I have observed this trend for about ten years in the logistics sector, where operations are continuously automated (loading and unloading of containers, storage, conveyance, and, more broadly, movement of goods, sorting of items, etc.). But this trend is apparent throughout the entire economy, including in new technologies.
Technical progress is forcing the renewal of professions, which are increasingly focusing on the design of automated solutions, while the field of execution is gradually becoming less human-centered. Personally, I have observed this trend over the past ten years in the logistics sector, where operations are continuously being automated (loading and unloading containers, storage, conveyance, and more broadly, the movement of goods, sorting of items, etc.). However, this trend is patent across the entire economy, including in new technologies.
Let’s summarize: competition and automation are weighing on the economy, while frustrations related to idealizations darken French state of mind. This evolution, which began in the late 1970s, is, in my opinion, the root cause of the successive collapses of political parties and the continued implosions through votes that express, more than a rejection of various political solutions, a denial of a certain reality.
The United States has proven, and continues to prove, that it is possible to succeed by staying at the forefront of technology. However, given the extent of automation, and the fact that a single company (Google, Microsoft, etc.) can meet global demand and dominate the market (winner takes all), is there enough room for everyone? And even if France, through Europe, could compete sustainably with the United States, at what cost would this be in terms of effort? Because competition manifests itself daily through ever-increasing demands from clients, stronger pressures, and this at all levels of the company.
However, we are not there yet since the Renaissance party seems to be on the brink of collapse, while those who could take over apparently do not have an adequate program to revive growth—a growth difficult to reconcile with environmental concerns. The election results of recent years, it seems to me, reflect a desire to maintain the political-economic ideals of the 20th century while reducing professional constraints, goals that seem difficult to reconcile in a world where the competition from other countries and automation are insurmountable horizons. That is why we find ourselves in a deadlock, and we do not seem ready to get out of it.