• FlowVoid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    The left won a plurality, the right is in charge.

    This is the counterargument to those who want multiparty democracy.

    • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      This is a counter argument to having a constitution that allows the president to do what Macron did. There are basically nothing stopping him besides tradition and good will.

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Every multiparty system allows someone to do what Macron did, it’s baked in. When no party has a majority, multiple coalitions are possible. Someone has to choose which of those possibilities gets the first opportunity to make a government.

        • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          As far as I know, by tradition, Macron should have taken the NFP’s candidate as prime minister even though they only had a small majority. Then the assembly could have censored the government or not, basically triggering a new election if they did.
          Macron, knowing what we want better than everyone else, took a shortcut by making shoddy alliances with the traditional right and the far right to name Barnier.

          The only reason he refused to name Castet was because she wanted to reverse his retirement reform (which was also rejected by the far right, so it could have actually been removed). But the official communications were all about “nobody really won the election” or “it would be ungovernable”.

          Macron is a child throwing tantrums because what he wants is best and he knows better than us peasants, he sees himself as a benevolent dictator, as in, he is making the tough decisions because he knows he’s right. And in our constitution, the president has extensive powers that allow him to act in such a way if he wants to, with basically no checks and balances but honesty and tradition.

          And in all that, some members of his former government won seats at the assembly, and kept their positions as ministers too. So we had deputies-ministers, wrapping up the “urgent matters” and setting themselves up for their next jobs. They effectively wrote budgets that, they themselves will vote for in the next few weeks. That’s effectively breaking the separation of power

    • cmder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      Nah nothing to do with multiparty, the problem is with the fith republic of France giving too much power to the president.

    • interurbain1er@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Technically the left didn’t win the majority of seat in the parliament. They have a relative majority as in they are the biggest group in parliament by a small margin but they don’t have the majority needed to make a stable government.

      A majority vote from the parliament can oust the PM and his government.

      If you take all the right wing parties, they hold the majority of seats (2/3rd). A left leaning government would last 48 hours, so in spite of french leftists telling everyone they “won”, they didn’t.

      Our electoral system is very flawed though and the current make up of the parliament is not representative of what people want, there are much better voting system for plurality based political system that could be implemented.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        In every country the biggest party would be the one that would at least get a first shot at forming a government.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          And if the leader of the second biggest party would rather work with the third biggest party?

          Then the biggest party could well remain out of government, because someone decided that a different coalition would form the government.

          The virtue of a two party popular vote is that once the votes are counted there is a clear winner determined by the voters, and nobody can change the winner behind the scenes.

          • jonne@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yes, that ends up happening sometimes, but the winner will at least be allowed to try.

            • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Coalition building happens in a two party system, too. The difference is that it happens before the election, not after. That way the voters, not the coalition builders, get the final say.

    • friendlymessage@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      The prime minister of France is not an elected position but appointed by the president. This has nothing to do with multiparty democracy.

          • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Not all positions, but the head of government is elected in the US.

            And if voters can’t choose the head of government, what are they voting for?

            • SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              France has a Head of State, the President, and a Head of Government, the Prime Minister. The PM is appointed by the President. The President is the head of the Executive branch, and the PM is the head of the Legislative branch.
              From the Wiki:

              The political system of France consists of an executive branch, a legislative branch, and a judicial branch. Executive power is exercised by the president of the republic and the Government. The Government consists of the prime minister and ministers. The prime minister is appointed by the president, and is responsible to Parliament. The government, including the prime minister, can be revoked by the National Assembly, the lower house of Parliament, through a motion of no-confidence; this ensures that the prime minister is practically always supported by a majority in the lower house (which, on most topics, has prominence over the upper house).

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_France

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Italy and Israel are among the purest forms of multiparty democracy, and I’ll take any FPTP government over those two.