Publisher's Note — November 17, 2016, 10:58 am

Mitterand’s Centenary

“Mitterand remains an emblematic figure for President François Hollande, who is trying to attach himself to his predecessor as he tanks in the polls.”

A version of this column originally ran in Le Devoir on November 7, 2016. Translated from the French by John Cullen.

One can find much to deplore in the life of François Mitterand, whose centenary passed on October 26: his work for Marshal Pétain during World War II, his postwar loyalty to René Bousquet and other figures linked with Vichy France, and the famous attentat de l’Observatoire, the Observatory Avenue attack, in which Mitterand himself, for political profit, is believed to have orchestrated a fake attempt on his life. One could also look down on him for the way he conducted his private affairs—his countless mistresses, who he would unceremoniouslydrop without really breaking offwith them—and for his behavior toward his allies and his constituents, who he would keep waiting for hours without explanation. The great man’s arrogance and selfishness can be irritating.

A story that particularly aggravates me is recounted by Laure Adler in her book François Mitterand, journées particulières (Flammarion) and concerns Mitterand’s choice of campaign headquarters when he was running as theSocialist Party candidate in the 1974 presidential race. “To the great astonishment of certain militants, Mitterand’s team sets up shop in the Tour Montparnasse,” a symbolic insult not only to the gracious architecture of Paris but also to the traditional conception of socialism. According to Adler, “the oldest members stress that a big alteration of scale was taking place in those days, and that the technical sophistication of the young ENA (National School of Administration) graduates, along with the arrival of the ‘communications pros,’ changed the game: politics became a highly specialized profession and a world in which brilliant, ambitious young people wanted to make their careers.” And, indeed, the Socialist Party, following Mitterand’s inclinations, was beginning its transformation into a party of executives and intellectuals, a party largely divorced from the working class and the common people; i.e., those most in need of protection against economic liberalism. The party was starting to change, in short, into the Socialist Party of today, which is outdistanced by the right-wing National Fronta party that profits from the anger of the unemployed and the disillusioned, who feel abandoned by the official left.

Nevertheless, Mitterand remains an emblematic figure for President François Hollande, who is trying to attach himself to his predecessor as hetanks in the polls. In an intraparty primary that he’s probably going to lose, Hollande is focused on placing himself in the wake of a politician whose tactical aptitude was extraordinary. At a recent ceremony held inside the Louvre Pyramid in remembrance of Mitterand, Hollande praised the former president’s “fierce will” and paid particular homage to the ideological flexibility that got Mitterand reelected to the presidency for a second term: “He was attacked by the right for being a leftist, and by a part of the left for not being left enough.”

To be sure. But sailors know that a little boat can be submerged in the wake of a bigger one, and at the European level, Mitterand’s wake is precisely what has engulfed his socialist successor and threatens to drown him. Mitterand stood godfather to the Europe of the euro and of German austerity. With the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, which established the European Union and, eventually, the euro, he tied France to a single currency, beyond national and democratic control, and to a foolishly rigid policy that prohibits any fiscal deficit over 3percent of GDPin the name, naturally, of economic and social stability. According to the American economist Joseph Stiglitz (in his book The Euro), the reality is exactly the opposite: “The Maastricht restrictions on fiscal deficits can effectively be an automatic destabilizer. As tax revenues plummet [for example, in the period following the 2008 crisis], when the 3 percent deficit target is breached, there have to be cutbacks in expenditures, which lead to further declines in GDP.” So here’s France, in a state of permanent instability ever since the inauguration of the euro in 2000, with an unemployment rate near 10 percent. Here’s France, suffering from industrial relocation that has demoralized an entire generation of workers and stripped them of their confidence in the future. Here’s France, dominated by the European Central Bank—which is itself dominated by Berlin—and deprived of the fiscal tools it could use to improve the health of the country.

I noted with interest the lively polemic that followed the publication of a collection of “conversations” with Hollande, Un président ne devrait pas dire ça, (A President Shouldn’t Say That) (Wipf andStock). Eithernarcissistic or downright stupid, this collection goes hand-in-hand with the recent publication of love letters from François Mitterand to Anne Pingeot, his clandestine mistress for more than thirty years. These books are two literary titbits that gloss over the contemporary collapse of the French left. Laure Adler convincingly describes Mitterand’s determination, his eagerness to conclude the Maastricht Treaty with the then German chancellorHelmut Kohl. He’d given his all, in December 1991, to realize “his greatest ambition… Ever since 1984, Mitterand had been walking at Kohl’s side, lavishing friendship on him unreservedly, calling him up for no good reason, introducing him to some of his favorite Parisian restaurants…” Sounds like a pair of lovers. The “Franco-German” couple and their child, the euro, are François Mitterand’s odd legacy, a legacy more important even than Mazarine, the long-hidden daughter he had with Anne Pingeot. François Hollande’s lot is to suffer that legacy’s consequences.

Share
Single Page

More from John R. MacArthur:

Publisher's Note November 10, 2017, 5:29 pm

Industrial Tourism

NAFTA is an investment contract that protects American and Canadian goods and interests against Mexican expropriation, regulation, and pestering by local authorities.

Publisher's Note October 5, 2017, 11:31 am

A Sad Heritage

Publisher's Note August 11, 2017, 5:34 pm

Le Chagrin

“Could I not avoid Trump and his bullshit, not even by crossing the Atlantic Ocean?”

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

December 2017

Dead Ball Situation

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Document of Barbarism

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Destroyer of Worlds

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Crossing Guards

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“I am Here Only for Working”

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Dear Rose

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Destroyer of Worlds·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In February 1947, Harper’s Magazine published Henry L. Stimson’s “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb.” As secretary of war, Stimson had served as the chief military adviser to President Truman, and recommended the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The terms of his unrepentant apologia, an excerpt of which appears on page 35, are now familiar to us: the risk of a dud made a demonstration too risky; the human cost of a land invasion would be too high; nothing short of the bomb’s awesome lethality would compel Japan to surrender. The bomb was the only option. Seventy years later, we find his reasoning unconvincing. Entirely aside from the destruction of the blasts themselves, the decision thrust the world irrevocably into a high-stakes arms race — in which, as Stimson took care to warn, the technology would proliferate, evolve, and quite possibly lead to the end of modern civilization. The first half of that forecast has long since come to pass, and the second feels as plausible as ever. Increasingly, the atmosphere seems to reflect the anxious days of the Cold War, albeit with more juvenile insults and more colorful threats. Terms once consigned to the history books — “madman theory,” “brinkmanship” — have returned to the news cycle with frightening regularity. In the pages that follow, seven writers and experts survey the current nuclear landscape. Our hope is to call attention to the bomb’s ever-present menace and point our way toward a world in which it finally ceases to exist.

Illustration by Darrel Rees. Source photographs: Kim Jong-un © ITAR-TASS Photo Agency/Alamy Stock Photo; Donald Trump © Yuri Gripas/Reuters/Newscom
Article
Crossing Guards·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Ambassador Bridge arcs over the Detroit River, connecting Detroit to Windsor, Ontario, the southernmost city in Canada. Driving in from the Canadian side, where I grew up, is like viewing a panorama of the Motor City’s rise and fall, visible on either side of the bridge’s turquoise steel stanchions. On the right are the tubular glass towers of the Renaissance Center, headquarters of General Motors, and Michigan Central Station, the rail terminal that closed in 1988. On the left is a rusted industrial corridor — fuel tanks, docks, abandoned warehouses. I have taken this route all my life, but one morning this spring, I crossed for the first time in a truck.

Illustration by Richard Mia
Article
“I am Here Only for Working”·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

But the exercise of labor is the worker’s own life-activity, the manifestation of his own life. . . . He works in order to live. He does not even reckon labor as part of his life, it is rather a sacrifice of his life.

— Karl Marx

Photograph from the United Arab Emirates by the author. This page: Ruwais Mall
Article
The Year of The Frog·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

To look at him, Sweet Macho was a beautiful horse, lean and strong with muscles that twitched beneath his shining black coat. A former racehorse, he carried himself with ceremony, prancing the field behind our house as though it were the winner’s circle. When he approached us that day at the edge of the yard, his eyes shone with what might’ve looked like intelligence but was actually a form of insanity. Not that there was any telling our mother’s boyfriend this — he fancied himself a cowboy.

“Horse 1,” by Nine Francois. Courtesy the artist and AgavePrint, Austin, Texas
Article
Dead Ball Situation·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

What We Think About When We Think About Soccer, by Simon Critchley. Penguin Books. 224 pages. $20.

Begin, as Wallace Stevens didn’t quite say, with the idea of it. I so like the idea of Simon Critchley, whose books offer philosophical takes on a variety of subjects: Stevens, David Bowie, suicide, humor, and now football — or soccer, as the US edition has it. (As a matter of principle I shall refer to this sport throughout as football.) “All of us are mysteriously affected by our names,” decides one of Milan Kundera’s characters in Immortality, and I like Critchley because his name would seem to have put him at a vocational disadvantage compared with Martin Heidegger, Søren Kierkegaard, or even, in the Anglophone world, A. J. Ayer or Richard Rorty. (How different philosophy might look today if someone called Nobby Stiles had been appointed as the Wykeham Professor of Logic.)

Tostão, No. 9, and Pelé, No. 10, celebrate Carlos Alberto’s final goal for Brazil in the World Cup final against Italy on June 21, 1970, Mexico City © Heidtmann/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

Chances that a gynecologist in Italy refuses to perform abortions for religious reasons:

7 in 10

A newly discovered microsnail can easily pass through the eye of a needle.

Moore’s wife published a letter of support signed by more than 50 pastors, and four of those pastors said they either had never seen the letter or had seen it before Moore was accused of sexual assault and asked to have their names removed.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today