Macron President. Quinio (SSF): a vote to restore optimism in France

The wish to give a wake-up call to France, to leave behind the inactivity of the past and continue having confidence in Europe has won. But most of all, optimism won. It won’t be an easy job. Future developments are unpredictable, but with the victory of Emmanuel Macron France can let out a sigh of relief. Dominique Quinio has been editor-in-chief of the French Catholic daily “La Croix” for many years. She is presently in charge of the Social Weeks of France. We asked her to analyse the vote of Sunday May 7. Definitive results show Emmanuel Macron winning 66.1% of the vote ahead of Marine Le Pen, at 33.9%. In absolute terms this means that 20 million voters have put their faith in the leader of “En Marche”, 10 million in the Front National. But the vote was marked by record abstention: 25.44% didn’t vote, 3.01% returned a blank ballot paper, while 1.06 million ballot papers were spoilt.

Madame Quinio, in your opinion what are the positive aspects of Macron’s victory?

The most positive aspect of Macron’s victory is the defeat of the Front National.

In fact, although Le Pen’s Party gained many votes, they are far less than expected. This large party, that managed to evolve in time, presented a worrying political program based on exclusion and division. The other positive aspect is that Macron ushered in the departure from a climate traditionally marked by historical Left-Right oppositions, in the attempt to involve those youths who share the yearning to give a wake-up call to France and reform it. Another positive aspect is the new President’s firm support of the European project. He was the only one to express confidence in Europe.

Who is Macron?

The new President has become engaged in political life only recently. We know he has great capabilities.

But we have to be concerned that he will be facing an extremely divided France.

This is true especially as regards urban versus rural areas; as regards those who believe that openness to the world should not be a reason for concern versus those who feel threatened by globalization. It’s a complex climate that political leaders will have to take into account. Moreover, Parliament majority cannot be taken for granted. This is a worrying aspect. Traditional political Parties, such as the Republicans and the Socialists, have no intention to envisage, nor are they used to reasoning in terms of coalitions, anchored as they are to the politics of a bloc fighting against an opposite bloc.

In answering the questions of a group of Italian students Pope Francis, although not explicitly mentioning Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen, spoke of a strongly divisive atmosphere, and of pre-election debates whereby candidates were “throwing stones against each other” instead of engaging in dialogue, “never letting the other finish.” He added: “If at such a high level the ability to dialogue is lacking, then the challenge of education to dialogue is a very demanding one.” What did you think when you heard these words? That the Pope is right. The election campaign was very aggressive. The harsh climate broke out in the first round of voting with the affaire Francois Fillon, and it continued.

The TV debate was deplorable

But I think it was because of the Front National candidate, who opened the debate with very aggressive tones, using strong words I had never heard before then. Macron replied with equally strong words. I think he did so to show that he was able to defend himself.

We are going through a historical period in which listening to each other’s arguments grows increasingly difficult. This inability sparks off a climate of mistrust and verbal aggressiveness. 
I perfectly agree. But this lack of dialogue is found at all levels, amidst political representatives, in the interaction of trade Unions and entrepreneurs, all unable to reach agreements and open negotiations that could prompt the recovery of the economy and labour. It’s an element that wormed its way throughout society, not only in France, and that in the case of France will make it hard to form a coalition government.

Another piece of criticism heard of in Italy called into question the French Catholic Church because it did not take a stand in support of a candidate and failed to sign the joint statement of Protestants, Muslims and Jews in support of Macron against the Front National. The Catholic Church’s position was thus described as ambiguous. Is that the case?  

My opinion is that the situation of French bishops was a very difficult one.

Before the election campaign they had published a very interesting document on politics (titled “Réhabiliter le politique”), that reiterated some strong thoughts of Church social doctrine. After the first round of voting the General Secretary of the Bishops’ Conference issued a statement which – although not explicitly mentioned – inferred that the Front National could not be an option, given its attitude against foreigners and migrants. Having said this, it should be added that for the bishops the situation was not an easy one. First of all because they were divided internally, and secondly because they were aware that also French Catholics were divided.

Opinion polls showed that a number of practising Catholics were determined to vote for the Front National, but many others abstained, while others still returned blank ballot papers.

So if the Bishops backs down and the Catholic Church is divided, what role can be played by Catholics in France today? 
As Social Weeks we took a clear stand, urging voters not to abstain nor to return blank ballot papers, because it would have played into the hands of the far Right, thereby increasing its vote percentage. We asked to vote for Emmanuel Macron, notwithstanding the awareness of the uncertainties that this vote implied. But for some time, and not only on this occasion, we called upon the faithful not to be closed within Christian communities but to be present in society and to be, as the Pope said, in dialogue with everyone, jointly seeking solutions and focusing on the best side of everyone, conscious of living in a plural society, with different visions that will require increasing mutual dialogue, refraining from attitudes of self-closure. Those who voted for Macron said they did so to restore optimism in France. Our Country has not looked at the future with hope for a long time. There is a widespread feeling of having missed an opportunity. Thus France has a deep need for people convinced that all is not lost and that something can be done. This is Catholics’ role today.