The French National Rally: An Interventionist Party, Doomed to Failure
The French National Rally (RN) is a highly interventionist party, even socialist in its approach, and is destined for failure. Its policies sustain ineffective and costly measures, straying far from the principles of economic freedom that have underpinned French prosperity. This piece exposes the internal contradictions of the RN, particularly regarding immigration, and advocates for a liberal renewal to revitalise the French economy and society.
© B. Le Cain
The RN proposes numerous interventionist policies, but let’s concentrate on its flagship initiative: reducing immigration. The proposed referendum on this topic will merely serve as a plebiscite for state intervention. Let’s delve into the specific measures being considered. The central idea involves reserving social assistance for French citizens and making access to solidarity benefits conditional on five years of work in France. This policy aims to exclude foreigners from welfare mechanisms rather than reforming the welfare state itself.
However, defining the relevant “social assistance” and distinguishing between French citizens and foreigners, especially in mixed families, is complicated. This complexity will result in bureaucratic expansion, increasing administrative costs without deterring immigration or halting subsidies for it.
Indeed, the RN programme includes new exemptions from social security contributions up to three times the minimum wage to encourage wage increases. Yet, immigrants, whom the RN seeks to exclude, are over-represented in these wage categories. By combining these exemptions with a progressive income tax, immigrants will continue to pay relatively little compared to the public services and social security benefits they receive, thus maintaining their subsidised lifestyle.
Lastly, it is important to note that the abuse of social benefits mainly involves the second generation of immigrants, who are predominantly French citizens. Consequently, the RN’s proposed measures concerning social assistance will have no significant impact.
The second set of measures proposed by the RN to control immigration involves the systematic expulsion of irregular immigrants and criminals. When dealing with criminals, one might expect the focus to be on punishment rather than providing a taxpayer-funded trip home.
This approach also overlooks the substantial costs of eviction proceedings. Beyond transportation, these costs include prior detention, accompaniment, and negotiations with the countries of origin. Additionally, expulsion does not prevent the clandestine return of migrants – who have sometimes previously entered illegally. Thus, this second set of measures represents a financial burden without guaranteed results.
Furthermore, the RN aims to oppose immigration from countries in the Global South in a generalised manner. This stance contradicts the principles of a market economy, where human movement is regulated by the free choice of individuals – both migrants and citizens of the host country. Without the distortions caused by state subsidies, immigration would always partly depend on the free choice of members of the destination country. Migration restrictions, like trade restrictions, limit the freedom of French people to engage with foreigners, thereby hindering France's economic development.
More seriously, the RN's blanket opposition to immigration from countries in the Global South, particularly Arab-Muslim countries, amounts to thinly veiled ethnic discrimination. This stance not only affects migrants but is also perceived as a threat by members of a diverse society. In an environment marked by the wholesale rejection of Africans, French citizens of North African or sub-Saharan origin may easily attribute all their difficulties to systemic racism.
The generalised opposition to immigration thus leads directly to policies of positive discrimination, to mitigate the consequences of this stance. These policies, in turn, increase bureaucracy and social tensions. Worse still, the rejection of African people at large fosters hatred and violence, which could become endemic. With the RN's desired presumption of self-defence for the police, this situation could encourage law enforcement to use their weapons more freely, potentially turning France into a powder keg.
Beyond the fact that the RN offers more risks than solutions, it is essential to highlight the role of the current political system in this situation. The RN's popularity is not surprising. Under the influence of state-controlled media and a state-dictated timetable, with state-backed candidates and parties, electoral campaigns have become large-scale exercises in public indoctrination, celebrating state interventionism. Voting, which should be a means for the population to control and limit the power of the state, is thus diverted from its true purpose.
To address France's economic and social challenges, it is crucial to return to a liberal vision that promotes economic freedom and reduces state intervention. Only by embracing the principles of liberty and individual responsibility can the country be revitalised, unlocking its potential for a prosperous and harmonious future.