The UMP should not rejoice too quickly over the latest results of the Socialist militants’ vote, which, despite numbers being revised daily upwards or downwards depending on the Federations, have ultimately not managed to clearly decide between Martine Aubry and Ségolène Royal. Certainly, for the moment, confusion and resentment prevail largely among the leaders on Rue de Solférino, who seem ill-equipped to embark on and succeed in a major electoral undertaking.
Whatever the outcome of Tuesday’s National Council meeting – validation of the results, launching a new consultation, or forming a collegial leadership – this vote, which leads to a much more serious crisis than the Congress of Rennes, could simultaneously herald a crucial turning point in the future of the Socialist Party. The fact that the militants defied the arithmetic calculations of the governing bodies, too certain of relying on the results of the motions, withdrawals, and declared supports, is just a sign of this.
Even if this gestation requires a little more time, it is highly likely that the Socialist Party will emerge, one way or another, transformed from these intense convulsions. To the point of experiencing in the near future a Copernican revolution similar to the one initiated in the late 1970s, where it launched, learning from the failures of the 1974 presidential elections, a series of aggiornamenti aimed at hearing the calls of its base and appearing to the general public as an authentic governing party. We will remember, for example, the radical evolutions on the nuclear issue following the passionate discussions held at the Montparnasse Tower between socialists and military experts. Even if the word worries or irritates within the PS, one cannot help but feel a sense of a “social democratic temptation” largely supported by the base.
Whether it pleases the descendants of Jaurès and Blum or not, and despite different traditions, this orientation aligns with trends long initiated by European socialist formations. These have managed to shed a good part of their radical ideology in exchange for the recognition of a “principle of reality” with a strong economic dimension. Whether they are called “Blairism,” “Zapatismo,” or even “Schröderisation,” these shifts do not guarantee taking or maintaining power but represent a condition difficult to bypass. The recent choice of the German SPD in favor of Vice Chancellor Frank-Walter Steinmeier against Kurt Beck as a candidate for the upcoming general elections beyond the Rhine largely illustrates this bet.
Although during the debates, the two candidates for the position of First Secretary of the PS did not truly innovate in terms of ideas, each speaking about “rallying,” “renewal,” and “anchoring to the left,” it is nonetheless evident, behind the apparent similarity of discourse – and without too much imagination – that there are two very divergent conceptions to express and represent the “French left.” The leaders of the UMP have understood this well, rejoicing too hastily at the possible arrival of Martine Aubry, “the best argument of the President’s party,” echoing the relevant reflections of Manuel Valls. However, the respite due to socialist cacophony might be short-lived. Whether she claims paternity or not, the former 2007 presidential candidate has just launched a dynamic which she certainly may not see reach its happy conclusion but which is likely to usher French Socialists into a new era. An era that might well benefit, one day soon, another socialist whose strange silence at these crucial moments probably has nothing to do with his geographical remoteness.
