Is it François Legault who follows in the footsteps of Emmanuel Macron or Emmanuel Macron who is inspired by François Legault? While they each practice a form of populism in their own way soft and that they are both heading towards an important electoral appointment, perhaps it is not surprising that in these times of popular exasperation, they are not averse to using this epidemic as a political weapon.
This is the choice made by Emmanuel Macron when he launched a small cluster bomb on January 4th. In The Parisian – who had not failed to have the interview reread before publication – he declared that he “very much wanted” to “piss off” the non-vaccinated, and to do it “to the end”. Regarding those who are not vaccinated, he said that “an irresponsible person is no longer a citizen”. Here, it was not so much the vulgarity that shocked as the choice to campaign by making these five million French people the scapegoats for the health disaster.
Opposing the chic populism of the French president to a good-natured populism, François Legault does nothing else. He also relies on the certainly sometimes legitimate exasperation of a majority of the population with regard to a minority of irresponsible people whom he promises to fine by imposing an additional “health contribution”. He too is trying to take advantage of popular exasperation by designating a section of the population for general vindictiveness to champion 90% of the voters.
Strangely, the Prime Minister does not seem to be concerned about the danger of turning taxes into an instrument to reward the good and punish the bad. When will there be a “contribution” for smokers, those who risk their lives in hang-gliding or who do not follow Canada’s food guide? In a democracy, it is the law that is the basis of the social contract and not the “desires” of each other. Not even those of a president or a prime minister. Because, according to the latest news, the non-vaccinated had broken no law!
Instead of multiplying vexatious measures against a population that has done nothing illegal, wouldn’t real political courage consist, for lack of anything better, in imposing compulsory vaccination of those over 50 years as Italy has just done? This would at least have the advantage of logic and perhaps make it possible to abandon the now derisory illusion of “zero COVID”. “Vaccinate the old, let the young live!” says epidemiologist Martin Blachier, according to whom it is imperative to learn to live with this virus.
This rhetoric which demonizes the “antivax” is all the more sterile since the rare French surveys on the non-vaccinated show that only a minority of them are truly opposed to vaccines. They generally live on the outskirts and are often isolated. Retired or unemployed, these people go neither to restaurants nor to the cinema. They were therefore not affected by the imposition of the health passport. Before resorting to the law, perhaps we should simply try to reach them through local approaches. France has an extraordinary network of family doctors for this, which it has not really used.
We recognize nevertheless that, on the political level, the attitude which consists in echoing the popular “disgruntlement” (as François Legault says) risks paying off in the short term. In France, Emmanuel Macron is suspected of having decided to campaign on COVID at the expense of the big issues that are tearing the country apart, such as immigration, security and the role of the state. Questions on which he has often ignored for five years.
However, this choice is risky.
This “want to annoy” could be the phrase too many for a president identified with the winners of globalization and who has multiplied the contemptuous remarks towards “people who are nothing” and who should “buy a suit” .
During natural disasters, although voters tend to favor the renewal of their leaders, an epidemic is not a flood. Emmanuel Macron thus runs the risk of putting his campaign in tow of a totally unpredictable virus. On Thursday, French teachers supported by parents spontaneously went on strike to protest against the imposition of health measures often decreed with less than 24 hours notice. And this, even if the population welcomes a government that has taken care to keep schools open.
Health policy remains important, but it alone cannot sum up the challenges that await France in the next five years. In 2017, the French came out of the presidential election with the feeling of having been cheated. The judicial investigations launched unexpectedly at the end of the campaign against the favorite François Fillon had turned the election upside down, relegated sovereign issues to the margins and opened the door to the one no one was expecting: Emmanuel Macron. History should not repeat itself during this epidemic.