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
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.
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
Capitalism IS the crises
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.
And he did it for personal reasons or because french capitalism needed it?