In the United States, much of the population waves a flag with pride, but does very little to concern itself with 'protecting the nation' economically. Consumerism stays outside of nationalism; shopping cheap at Wal-Mart is separate from patriotism (unions be damned).
In France, the flag is very rarely waved, but much of the economic rhetoric is devoted to 'protecting the nation'. National pride trumps consumerism ; buying chinese is not separated from patriotism (corporations be damned).
Therefore, if Segolene successfully brings American-style flag waving patriotism forward, does she create ideological room for acting more flexibly economically once in power? By spontaneously creating a more fetishistic nationalism cleanly disassociated from economics, doesn't handling the economy suddenly become 'more free'?
Sarkozy, by raising the immigrant scarecrow, achieves a similar purpose. A well-fueled fear of the immigrant allows a certain flexibility once in power. But the fear of the foreigner is a well-worn bait-and-switch; Segolene's, especially coming from the left, is brand new and who knows what she's switching?
Comments