Paul from Paris

1. Did Sarkozy lose the election, or for the incumbent was this race unwinnable? Did Sarkozy and his handlers tragically misread or underestimate the strength and depth of anti-Sarkozy sentiment in the electorate?
2. Does Hollande hold a mandate for anything? Did his blandness and seeming lack of substance improve his performance as the anti-incumbent?
3. Which was the greatest disservice to Sarkozy’s campaign: morose economic conditions that would be a curse to any candidate; policy proposals that struck voters as unattractive (or even repulsive); or the candidate’s own personality (hyperactive, ever-changing)?
4. Sarkozy held off, for a long time, in declaring his candidacy for re-election. Would his campaign have been better served had he officially announced his intention to seek re-election the day (before? after?) Hollande was anointed as his challenger?
5. In 2007, Sarkozy ran as a candidate of change. This was no mean feat, as conservatives were in power, and Sarkozy held ministerial portfolios. In 2012, Sarkozy ran as an outsider (not as the incumbent, based on a record) seeking –paradoxically– to preserve (or conserve, but not to change) French institutions and lifestyle. Would Sarkozy have been better served by running, again in 2012, as the candidate for change?
6. In 2007, Sarkozy’s “travailler plus pour gagner plus” (work more to earn more, earn more by working more) echoed Blair’s call for an “opportunity society”: both championed for social mobility. By 2012, social mobility disappeared from Sarkozy’s objectives. Evocations of “travail” (work) rang hollow and divisive. Would the Sarkozy campaign have stood better chances had the incumbent positioned himself as an advocate for social mobility?
7. Sarkozy’s 2007 campaign slogan echoed an exhortation made long ago, under the reign of King Louis-Philippe, by statesman François Guizot: “Enrichissez-vous” (enrich yourselves). Both slogans shrugged off traditional unease with money and shone a favorable light on material prosperity. Unfavorable publicity surrounding Sarkozy –a celebratory dinner on the Champs-Elysées, a respite on a billionaire’s yacht, a noticeable penchant for aviator sunglasses and collectable watches– tempered arguments in favor of making money. Since the financial crisis, growth seems not to be even an option in Sarkozy’s mind. By 2012, any tax relief seemed off the table; Sarkozy instead pushed for a tax rearrangement that would cut some payroll taxes but boost VAT, paid by all and felt heavily by lower-income households. Would Sarkozy’s prospects have shown more promise had the candidate at least paid lip service to the goal of increasing household income and bettering material circumstances?
8. Until a year ago, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the socialist also-ran tapped by Sarkozy to head the IMF, seemed, largely on a widely shared assumption of economic competence, likely to win his party’s nomination and the 2012 presidential election. Once Strauss-Kahn ceased to be a political rival, why didn’t Sarkozy and his handlers build the incumbent’s campaign around economic themes, developed over several months?

15 August 1961.
Conrad Schumann was 19.

Despite an abundance of civic-minded talent among conservatives, French president Sarkozy continues to surround himself with people whom he knows but who lack policy skill or political savvy.

The most recent diplomatic blunder comes from the woman in charge of French diplomacy, foreign affairs minister Michèle Alliot-Marie.

Alliot-Marie was practically born into politics: her father was a political figure in the French Basque country (and is today a rugby referee, which in some respects is a higher political calling). Alliot-Marie long served as a local official on the Atlantic coast and as an MP. As though she were playing a ministerial Monopoly game, Alliot-Marie assumed the foreign affairs ministry last year, after having previously served in  conservative governments over the past twenty-five years as minister for justice, interior, defense, youth, and education.

Despite an impressive background in politics, Alliot-Marie has made some remarkably impolitic blunders in the past weeks.

Most recently, Alliot-Marie made an appearance in Cairo where she flattered the Mubarak regime with praise that seems not to have been necessary or diplomatically expedient.

This absence of diplomatic caution is all the more remarkable as Alliot-Marie had faced public criticism, only a few weeks earlier, in the wake of an offer of French savoir-faire in policing or riot control to the Ben Ali regime in Tunisia.

The revelation that most calls into question Alliot-Marie’s judgment is also the most personal, concerning a vacation Alliot-Marie took with her husband (a longtime conservative MP, now deputy minister for parliamentary relations) during a vacation between Christmas and the New Year.

Given that protest had already gripped Tunisia before her departure, Alliot-Marie’s first lapse in judgment was going on the holiday at all: even while traveling as a private person, Alliot-Marie’s ministerial function would give rise to all sorts of speculation.

More fundamentally, while on vacation, Alliot-Marie rode in a private jet and stayed at a luxury hotel owned by Tunisian businessman Aziz Miled. On this point, French commentators have gotten sidetracked, intrigued with minutia such as whether Miled was part of or apart from the Ben Ali regime. This misses the fundamental political point of accepting gifts, especially those offered by foreigners in turbulent places to the political head of a diplomatic service. It is remarkable that a diplomatic head, seasoned by decades in politics, would fail to appreciate the appearance of impropriety that accepting such gifts -calls for Alliot-Marie or her husband to produce receipts (for the hotel stay) have, so far, gone unanswered- would create. It is despairing that she would not have thought to take a few steps to make sure such an appearance would never be created.

couverture du magazine Ikea Family Live (hiver 2010)

“Et si vous fixiez vos propres règles?”

Voici la question posée en couverture de Ikea Family Live magazine, publication du magasin suédois éponyme destinée surtout aux consommateurs parents de jeunes enfants en quête d’”idées et inspiration pour la maison”.

Il s’agit d’une question ouverte, un brin provocante tout en gardant le ton bon enfant du magazine et du magasin.

C’est aussi une réponse à l’affirmation de la RATP à bord des bus parisiens : “Si chacun fait ses propres règles, tout se dérègle.”

Il s’agit, pour la RATP, d’un énoncé fermé, vaguement ménaçant, qui n’admet pas de discussion. Bizarrement, c’est aussi un mécanisme à disculper la RATP de dysfonctionnements : l’origine de dérèglements se trouverait auprès des usagers, intempestivement innovateurs.

Danish artist Peder‘s “Daylight” has been getting air time on Radio Nova in France and is available through Fake Diamond Records everywhere. I’ve heard it described as trip-hop but would brand it Scandinavian jazz. The composition is slow, almost a dirge, with faintly accented vocals by Signe Marie Schmidt-Jacobsen.

Directors Thomas Daneskov and Alexander Topsøe, with cinematographer Jasper Spanning, have put together a remarkable and haunting music video for “Daylight”.

Imagine: a music video with adults and adult themes. The aesthetics are European, even Danish: the storyline is plainly sexual, with depth and unusual sensibilities. It’s a fairy tale. The images toy with what the viewer cannot see; references to time and night play with the vocalist’s references to daylight. The actors’ facial expressions are magnificent.

Peder – Daylight [feat. Signe Marie Schmidt-Jacobsen] from Fake Diamond Records on Vimeo.