• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I mean that was the point of Macron’s gambit. Don’t let it wait. Strike while you’ve still got a chance instead of dragging out a loss. Its going to be interesting to find out if this works.

    • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Macron destroyed the traditional two parties by doing exactly this. Scaring voters away from the two extremes by monopolising the moderate voices. Only opposition becomes extreme idiots

      • FreudianCafe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Thats wrong. Macron could not do any of this even if he wanted. Polarization is related to the instability of a regime. Capitalism is in deep crisis and the extreme positions start growing, while center positions become weaker until they cease to have any meaningfull existence. Its also naive to think that you can go back to when centrism was viable. Its not a matter of liking it or not, its how it works. Macron isnt dictating how history progress, its history that will do a driveby over Macron

        • Akasazh@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Macron was the centrist alternative last time around. He eroded his support by the way he conducted the country, foremost by how he unilaterally pushed retirement legislation through against the will of the parliament.

          So he had a hand in undermining the centrist position so in a way he did dictate historical progress.