Following the results of the elections on March 20 and 27 and the composition of the Departmental Assembly, some considerations must be made beyond political divides. Just to not turn the page without pointing out what appears obvious but that the ruling “nomenklatura” pretends not to see, looking elsewhere for what is right under their nose!
The composition of the Departmental Assembly calls for an observation and opens the door to an analysis: the very small number of women and young people under forty. The demographic composition of society, and consequently the electorate, would require better representation within a political body that also intends to be one of “proximity.”
Underrepresented Women and Young People
Women were candidates in sufficient numbers to comply with the parity law but… they were “only” substitutes! An auxiliary role speaks volumes about the difficulties they face in asserting themselves in an equal context that is sensitive to words but genuinely “masculine” in practice.
And what about the “young” people whose modern and refreshing contribution is always invoked, an added value, but of whom only a few are confined to playing the role of “parrot” without having neither role nor weight?
“Upper Class” People Distant from the “Lower Class”
Indeed, one might say that this assembly is more a representation of “people formed in the same mold, obeying the same codes, locked in their ivory tower” (as political commentators so aptly put it).
So why be surprised that the “lower class” people no longer identify with this “upper class” political body? From a sociological point of view, how can this political class of notables, often from privileged backgrounds, consider themselves representative of a society composed mainly of people from modest origins?
To understand an abstention rate of almost 60%, which makes this refusal to vote an act of non-participation in democratic life, politicians could start their reflections by looking at themselves in the mirror.
