After
the Brexit vote, the contentious run-off elections in Austria, and the
formation of a minority government in Spain, the French presidential elections
slated for April could provide the next big thing in European politics (provided
that Angela Merkel isn’t upset by the results of Germany’s presidential elections next
week). Marine Le Pen, head of France’s far right party, Le Front National (FN),
is poised make it through the first round of elections and pose a serious
challenge for her opponents in the final run-off for the presidency. Furthermore
it is also probable that both the Socialist Party and the Republicans,
traditionally France’s two largest parties, will not have candidates in the
final round.
My host university, Sciences Po, provides the perfect atmosphere to watch the politics unfold. Like most Hoyas back home, students here are really into politics and are quick to mention that three of the last four French presidents have graduated from Sciences Po. Probably the easiest conversation starter with a French classmate is simply to ask them who they are voting for and why, which, by the way, is surprisingly not taboo like it is in the United States.
One unique tradition at Sciences Po is the Grand O, short for the Grand Oral. Normally, the Grand O refers to an end-of-the-year final exam for Sciences Po students. However, during election season presidential candidates come to Sciences Po to have their own Grand O—a live debate broadcasted by the student group Sciences Po TV, during which 500 students turn the tables and bombard candidates with questions on and critiques of their presidential programs.
Not every Grand O went according to plan this year. Florian Philippot, second in command of the FN, was supposed to defend his party’s program in November. Motorcades lined the streets around school, and students waited hours in line to save their spot. However, a small group of 30 students (out of student body of 14,000) blocked the entrance to the venue and prevented Philippot from speaking. The incident was well-covered, and France’s largest national newspaper even published an article on it.
To understand these students’ opposition to Philippot’s Grand O, you have to know a bit about the FN and its evolution as a party. The FN was founded in the early 1970s by Jean-Marie Le Pen, known for racist, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic comments such as saying the Holocaust was a mere detail of World War II (it’s not surprising that the Jewish students union was well-represented among the 30 protestors). His daughter, Marine, took over the party in 2011 and has since tried to detoxify the party’s image as the extreme right by rejecting her father’s comments, strong-arming him into leaving the party, and toning down party rhetoric.
Detractors, like the student protesters, think the party still shares the prejudices of its founder and any change in rhetoric is just a façade. So, any step towards normalizing the party image or spreading its ideas should not be tolerated. On the other hand, the organizers, who also oppose the FN, disagreed. They said that in preventing Philippot from speaking, the group only helped validate the party’s anti-elite discourse, which has helped it steadily gain support among the French electorate.
What’s interesting was that around the same time, my Facebook newsfeed was blowing up with posts on the free speech vs. safe space debate on U.S. campuses. Both have encouraged reflection. Is it right or even logical to restrain free speech in the name of tolerance and the fight against discrimination? While the end goal might be just, is the means? And, even more important, is the strategy even effective?
Opens in a new window