You know, I'm basically a Catholic, but I believe deeply in the virtues of democracy (that an overly simplistic view is misleading). Moreover, in absolute terms, if our republic was a true democracy, you would be asked to vote every 15 days on a specific subject, as in Switzerland.
Also, some will say that it is useless. But, as I keep telling you, EVERYTHING stems from politics, whether local, national or global.
Also, for once they take the risk of asking us for our opinion, I think it would be cowardly not to give it, and before having the Front National reflex, know what you are doing... (additional information ).
And if you don't want to favor any of the lists present, you can very well vote blank, but VOTE, from what I know, some of your civic rights are even conditional on the fact that you participated in the elections.
Happy sunny Sunday; )
friendships
F.
Atlantico: The abstention rate in the first round of municipal elections could reach 40%, according to an Ipsos study. The reasons are quite classic: disappointment, weariness, distrust, ... but would be reinforced by the political and judicial affairs of recent weeks. Why should this political desertion incite us to vote? Do we send a stronger message by going to vote than by abstaining?
Jean Peteaux: I believe that this idea that "one sends a stronger message by going to vote than by abstaining" is indeed very "anchored" in the heads and minds of citizens who have been trained in the exercise of competitive democracy for several generations. It is the idea, commonly held, according to which "the absent are always wrong and have no say in the matter later". So there would be a categorical imperative to vote. Especially since another argument is often invoked by the "participationists": "Respect for the memory of those who fought for the establishment of universal suffrage". A kind of "duty to vote" associated with the "duty of memory" in a way. To put the impact of the current situation on abstention into perspective, it should be remembered that since the start of the Fifth Republic in October 1958, out of the 9 municipal elections organized, the lowest abstention rate was that of the second round of 1983. (20,3% compared to those registered) and the strongest abstention was noted during the first round of the last municipal elections, in March 2008 (35,5%). That is a differential of more than 15 points.
Abstention increased by 2,9% between the first round of 2001 and that of 2008. It is therefore a fairly strong trend which tends to dissociate the correlation between the "political climate" of the moment and collective behavior at the regard to the increasingly weak electoral expression. And this phenomenon is absolutely not unique to France. Even in Belgium where voting is compulsory under penalty of a fine, many voters prefer to expose themselves to a penalty rather than travel to vote.
If you had to identify five real reasons to go and vote for the municipal elections, a particular ballot due to its local character, what would they be? How can these five causes have concrete implications?
I tend to consider with great circumspection the "real" or the "good" reasons (just like the "bad" ones for that matter), these, "positive" or "negative" are specific to each individual and, I hope, do not proceed from a doxa which would say the “good” and the “evil”. So by trying not to get into the argument " ad valorem I will answer rather in terms of municipal competences. In other words: on what files, on what public actions, is the municipal team for which I am going to vote able to intervene?
A citizen who will take an interest in childhood policy (crèches, school timetables, maintenance of nursery and primary schools), to urban planning (building permit, urban planning, development of this or that district), cleanliness (garbage removal, selective sorting policy), municipal public security, social assistance, local taxation (households but also companies), culture, sports, green spaces, paid parking (you see that there is plenty to do and I inevitably forget many other subjects), this citizen can tell himself that it is “worth it” to devote 30 minutes of their day, on March 23 and/or March 30, to going to vote. But, where the assessment becomes more complex, it is that, more and more, the competences and the public actors are imbricated the ones in the others, and that the files are never really strictly municipal domain. We see this for example on the question of “school rhythms” where the State (Ministry of Education), possibly the Departments (school bus service in rural areas) and Municipalities (in the front line) are involved in this question... is in the sense that the municipal elections take on a national connotation, quite simply because all this "makes a system" and that there are no 36.500 municipal "micro-republics" which would not be impacted by departmental, regional, national policies and European… or even by the effects of globalization of course.
Who would benefit the most from an abstention?
The National Front and the UMP insofar as the latest polls tend to indicate that the socialist electorate will be more “abstentionist” than the electorate who voted for Sarkozy in May 2012. The FN quite simply because mechanically if the parties “ majority" do not mobilize their voters, the FN will automatically increase its relative share among the votes cast since it will have been able to mobilize. In the second round, on the other hand, it is likely that a sort of participative “surprise” (essentially on the left) will lead to a reduction in abstention. It is rather the trend even if we saw in the municipal elections of 1971 and 1977 a stronger abstention in the second round than in the first round. At the last municipal elections in 2008, abstention fell by 4,5% between the two rounds.
This is one of the two major novelties of this ballot: the simultaneous election of elected municipal officials as well as community delegates, who represent their municipality within the communities of municipalities, urban communities, urban communities or metropolises. What is the significance of their election?
First of all, it is not impossible that the proportion of invalid ballots, due to a deletion on one of the two lists, increases considerably. Especially with the lowering of the threshold from 3500 to 1000 inhabitants (i.e. now 9000 municipalities in France, nearly 25% of the total of 36500 municipalities in France) prohibiting “mixing lists” or “crossing out” them. Many voters, accustomed to practicing this "electoral sport" which is nicely called "pigeon shooting" on the candidates, will continue to practice this "sport" and their ballot will be automatically cancelled. In the same way that "touching" one of the two lists present on the ballot will automatically invalidate the entire ballot and even the vote on the list left intact...
As for the importance of the election of delegates to intermunicipalities by "quasi-direct" suffrage, it will be due to three effects: 1. gender parity is now imposed in the composition of the boards of EPCIs (public cooperation establishments intermunicipal (communities of municipalities, urban communities, urban or metropolis communities); 2. on the very evening of the municipal election, voters will know exactly who will sit in these bodies and what their "partisan colors" will be; 3. the Community delegates themselves will have greater democratic and electoral legitimacy than before, which will allow them to speak louder and louder in future exchanges with elected municipal and municipal officials who are not members of the intermunicipal authority. will still be, in my view, limited. It will only be full and complete and the intermunicipalities will then take on their full weight only when the elected members of these institutions are elected directly, on an intermunicipal list, without necessarily being municipal councilors elected in a municipality making up the municipality. intermunicipality. And from there the municipalities in the historical sense (that of children of the Revolution of 1789) will really be on borrowed time...
It is often said that not voting is letting others decide for us. Why shouldn't we lose our civic sense?
I already answered this question. In the general crisis of the questioning of institutions that my Bordeaux colleague François Dubet has studied very well, voting often appears to be outdated or even perverse. The now recurrent opposition between “representative democracy” and “participatory democracy” demonstrates this clearly. It is not for me to say why “we must not lose our civic sense”. What I see is that this very notion of "civic sense" is no longer easily definable as it once was, when "secular and republican morality" proposed a series of "maxims" intended to compete the catechism of the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church, not very republican (in the first years of the Third Republic at the very least…). “Civic education”, “civic sense”, “civic duty”: all these expressions corresponded to a body of norms enjoining the citizen to fully assume his role.
But they are also part of a time when apart from the ballot, the founding act of the status of citizen, the latter had hardly any other forms of expression at his disposal apart from strikes and demonstrations. which was its corollary (regularly considered as insurrectionary and too often repressed with extreme violence, the history of social and workers' struggles bears eloquent witness to this). Today every individual has a plethora of means of expression to make his dissatisfaction known. Not to mention the phenomenon specific to the "democracy of opinion" or "poll" which delivers weekly "snapshots" of opinion, ending up like so many pixels on a digital image, by "making sense" for lack of "making citizenship”. So if there was only one answer to your question, it would always be basically the same: “we haven't yet done much better than universal suffrage to gather the opinion of citizens”. No offense to the champions of pseudo-democracy by social networks who consider this means as the ultimate in citizen expression now, simply taking bladders for lanterns...
Interview by Marie Deghetto
From Friday at midnight, until Sunday 20 p.m., very strict rules apply to candidates, but also to Internet users. In accordance with article L. 52-2 of the electoral code, it is forbidden to post a comment that could influence the vote, or a result. The fine provided for in the event of a sanction is 3.750 euros. This is why, as a preventive measure, we are closing articles referring to municipal elections for comments this weekend. Thank you for your understanding.
source: Atlantico.fr
Additional information :
Crashdebug.fr: Supplementary Investigation of 13/02: LE PEN “A family affair…”
Terms & Conditions
Subscribe
Report
My comments