France in revolt shows our power

By Charlie Kimber in Paris

from Socialist Worker UK

The fightback in France against attacks on pensions has shown magnificent resistance. 

Workers are fighting President Nicolas Sarkozy’s attempts to make them pay more for their pension and to work to 67 before they get a guaranteed full pension. 

It is the main symbol of the rich trying to make workers pay for the crisis.

Persecution of Roma worsens in Europe

By Tony Iltis
From Green Left Weekly
Saturday, September 4, 2010

Romani people face off riot police during a rally in Montreuil, France. The French government deported hundreds of Roma in August for ‘threatening public order’. 

In scenes reminiscent of the Nazi German occupation, French police rounded up almost 1000 Romani people (sometimes called Gypsies) in August and deported them to Romania and Bulgaria. 

The mass deportations were foreshadowed by President Nicolas Sarkozy in July in a series of inflammatory speeches in which he accused Romani people of being in an “unacceptable situation of lawlessness” linked to “illicit trafficking, deeply unworthy living conditions and exploitation of children for begging, prostitution or crime”.

Romani camps across France were bulldozed and Roma with Romanian or Bulgarian citizenship were given a choice of “voluntary repatriation” (with a payment of 300 euros to each adult and 100 euros for each child) or being deported for “threatening public order”.

On August 31, an administrative court in Lille blocked the deportation of seven Roma, casting doubt on the legality of the “threatening public order” pretext. Romania and Bulgaria have been European Union members since 2007, giving their citizens the right of free movement between EU countries. 

The legality of the deportations has also been questioned by EU and United Nations human rights agencies, as well as Amnesty International.

The Roma are Europe’s largest minority, estimated at between 5 million and 9 million. They have historically faced appalling treatment — subjected to slavery, mass deportations, exclusion and violent pogroms. 

ANOTHER LEFT IS POSSIBLE: The Protests in France and the New Anti-Capitalist Party

by Nathan Rao from Socialist Voice Originally published in Rabble.ca 8 April 2009 It would be wrong to see the massively successful protest actions in France [March 21] as distant and exotic, of no particular relevance to us here in Canada. With the economic meltdown heralding a new political era, and with most of the country's Left and social movements still stunned and disoriented following their embrace of the misguided and failed Liberal-led coalition plan, the French experience is instructive and inspiring.

Continue

France: Capitalist crisis and mass strike set scene for NPA

by Sam Wainwright

from Green Left Weekly

14 February 2009

On the weekend of February 7-8, over 600 delegates and as many observers attended the founding conference of France's New Anti-capitalist Party (NPA), held at la Plaine-Saint-Denis in the working class suburbs to the north of Paris.

Less than a week before, on January 29; around 2.5 million people took to the streets across the country as part of a nationwide strike against the efforts of the government of Nicolas Sarkozy to foist the burden of the capitalist economic crisis on to working people.

Continue

See also France: Towards the foundation of a New Anti-Capitalist Party

France: General strike hits

by Stuart Munckton from Green Left Weekly 30 January 2009 “Huge crowds have taken to the streets in France to protest over the handling of the economic crisis, causing disruption to rail and air services”, according to a January 29 BBC News report. Unions estimated that 2.5 million workers had taken to the streets as part of a one-day general strike to demand action on unemployment, wages and the rising cost of living. Unions had organised more than 200 separate demonstrations across the country. President Nicolas Sarkozy was forced to acknowledge the legitimacy of the concerns of the protests and that his government was compelled to “listen and act”, according to BBC News. The strike involved transport, education and other services and was organised by France’s eight biggest unions. According to a January 29 Bloomberg business news report, France’s rail network, airports and public schools were disrupted. According to BBC News, “banks, hospitals, post offices and courts were also hit”. Bloosmberg reported: “Unions representing doctors, nurses, Bank of France employees, television and radio stations and other civil servants asked for ‘urgent measures for employment and wages’ and a further boost to the economy. “Employees of companies including Electricite de France SA, France Telecom SA and French units of International Business Machines Corp. and Hewlett- Packard Co. are among those participating in the strike.” Public support for the strike was running at 69%, according to a January 25 poll by CSA-Opinion. It’s the first time in Sarkozy’s presidency that a “social movement” has had such public approval, stated Stephane Rozes, head of CSA-Opinion according to Bloomberg. “Many people are furious that Mr Sarkozy said there was no money left to raise wages and consumer spending power, but nonetheless managed to find billions of euros to bail out floundering French banks”, according to BBC News. “Mr Sarkozy cannot ignore this demonstration of anger.” Unemployment is heading towards 10%, and Sarkozy’s plan for cost cutting is creating a feeling that people are paying for a crisis they didn’t cause, a union leader commented to BBC News.

Week of Mass Strikes Set to Paralyze France in Protest Against Sarkozy's Reforms

by Angelique Chrisafis from The Guardian UK 27 January 2009 Nicolas Sarkozy this week faces the first mass-protests over his handling of the financial crisis as unions prepare to paralyse France in a general strike uniting train-drivers, air traffic controllers, journalists, bank staff and even ski-lift operators. "Black Thursday" is the first general strike since the French president's election in 2007. All the leading unions have joined forces to protest that the government's stimulus plans should focus less on companies and more on workers' job-protection and purchasing power. The protests reflect a mood of social unrest that has been building for months. Unemployment had dropped in the first half of last year but it is now spiralling, particularly among the young, and is forecast to reach 10% in 2010. The recession is predicted to be worse than thought while flagging exports and consumer sales have hammered the manufacturing sector. The strike will unite private and public sector workers from schools, hospitals national TV and radio to postal services, bank clerks and supermarket employees. Even helicopter pilots and staff from the company that operates the French stock exchange are taking part. High school pupils, university lecturers, lawyers and magistrates will also protest a raft of Sarkozy's reforms and planned job cuts. Despite the predicted chaos, one poll found that 70% of French people either support or sympathise with the strikes. "It's very rare for our bank workers to join in this kind of strike action," said Lionel Manchin, of the SNIACAM independent union at the bank Credit Agricole. "This is about protecting jobs and protecting our purchasing power. The bosses have been well protected with their salaries, it's now time to protect the workers." The strikes follow months of tension after high school students delayed an education reform with sit-ins, strikes and demonstrations. Earlier this month a radical union led a strike that shut down Paris's second biggest railway station, leaving hundreds of thousands of commuters stranded. In the past two weeks, Sarkozy has criss-crossed the country giving more than 17 new year speeches, but protesters have been kept in check by riot police. Describing the general mood of discontent, the MP Philippe Cochet, from Sarkozy's ruling UMP party, told Le Monde, "I feel a violence being born. In schools, for example, there's a very strong mobilisation." Bernard Thibault, leader of the powerful, communist-leaning CGT union, said the protests could be bigger than those of 2006 which saw 3 million take to the streets against a new youth employment contract, the CPE. Sarkozy will today make a speech on measures for the unemployed in an attempt to defuse tension. At the weekend, a coalition of psychiatrists, health workers, judges, teachers and researchers will meet to discuss their joint appeal in protest at a range of the president's reforms. Oliver Besancenot, leader of the Communist Revolutionary League, is then hoping to benefit from the mood by launching his anti-capitalist party. The strike action kicked off yesterday with stoppages by university lecturers and researchers over higher education reform. High school pupils also hope Thursday's strike will boost their demonstrations against school reform. Zaki Marouane, 19, secretary general of the Lycee pupils' union, FIDL, said: "We're taking to the streets again and our banners will read: "We refuse to be the children of the financial crisis!"

ANOTHER LEFT IS POSSIBLE: The Protests in France and the New Anti-Capitalist Party

by Nathan Rao from Socialist Voice Originally published in Rabble.ca 8 April 2009 It would be wrong to see the massively successful protest actions in France [March 21] as distant and exotic, of no particular relevance to us here in Canada. With the economic meltdown heralding a new political era, and with most of the country's Left and social movements still stunned and disoriented following their embrace of the misguided and failed Liberal-led coalition plan, the French experience is instructive and inspiring. France has just gone through another day of mass strikes and protests against the hard-Right government of president Nicolas Sarkozy. The protest action is hugely popular in opinion polls and comes on the heels of another successful but smaller day of action on January 29, a victorious six-week general strike on the Caribbean island of Guadeloupe that spread to other overseas colonial territories and the proliferation of radical protest actions among students and in a number of workplaces -- all in the context of growing job losses and a deepening financial and economic crisis. 'France's Thatcher' on the defensive Not long ago, Sarkozy was widely hailed in Anglo-American circles, from the Blairite 'centre-Left' across to the Bushite and Harperite neo-conservative Right, as the French Thatcher -- the man that would usher in the 'normalization' of French society by at long last breaking resistance to growing inequality, job insecurity, privatization and cutbacks. And yet, a mere 18 months into his mandate the swaggering and obnoxious Sarkozy is now stumbling in the face of the resilience and scale of popular resistance. Though still very far from being defeated, Sarkozy and the neoliberal project more generally are on the defensive in France, a country at the heart of the global capitalist and imperial order. This has not failed to raise a few eyebrows in other European and western capitals, where the fear is that developments in France will serve as an example for workers and young people in their own countries. Further stoking these fears is the fact that Olivier Besancenot -- the 34-year-old postal worker and spokesperson of the newly created New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA) -- has consolidated his position as by far the most popular opposition figure in the country. For several months now, polls have ranked him well ahead of the leader of the nominally social-democratic Socialist Party (PS), Martine Aubry -- and even further ahead of the PS candidate in the 2007 presidential elections, Segolene Royal, and centre-Right leader Francois Bayrou. Besancenot recently even earned the unusual distinction of being the only left-wing and working-class figure to be named to the Financial Times list of 50 people 'who will frame the debate on the future of capitalism.' New Party, New Politics for France's Left As its name suggests, the NPA has an explicitly anti-capitalist profile and its program calls for a revolutionary transformation of the country's political institutions and property relations. It is an activist party, with a growing base of more than 10,000 members across the country involved in local organizing efforts and broad activist campaigns and the internal work and debates of the NPA itself. The party brings together former members of the largest surviving (and now 'self-dissolved') organization of the 1968-era far-Left (the 'Trotskyist' LCR), a wide array of experienced and previously non-party-affiliated trade-union and social-movement activists, a new generation of radicalized students and youth and a significant layer of people of all ages for whom the party is their first political experience ever. It is quite easily -- certainly within the industrialized world at any rate -- the most dynamic and radical example of attempts at fashioning a left-wing alternative to the increasingly discredited policies and institutions of neoliberalism and capitalism. Relevant to Canada's Left? This is all very heady stuff. So heady, in fact, that it is tempting to see these developments in France as distant and exotic, of no particular relevance to our own work and debates here in Canada. That would be unfortunate. To be sure, there are important differences between the context and relationship of forces in the two countries. For one thing, today's protest movements are at least in part an extension of those that have shaken France since late 1995; and the initiative to found the NPA was taken only after a long, complicated and occasionally rancorous debate between the various political and social-movement forces involved in these movements in one way or another. It will certainly take time and a significant upsurge of protest and resistance in Canada before these kinds of debates get any kind of traction beyond the margins of political life here. Fundamentally, however, the strategic lay of the land in the two countries is not so dramatically different. Whatever the fate of Sarkozy's cabinet in the face of the present protest movement or of Sarkozy himself in the 2012 presidential elections, the NPA are under no illusions that there will be a serious breakthrough for anti-capitalists in the short term. Even in France, the relationship of forces and rules of the institutional game are firmly stacked against such an outcome. The NPA understand that they are just now entering a long period of rebuilding working-class and anti-systemic movements and of developing a new vision and strategy for enduring radical change. This is something the party's program describes as '21st century socialism,' tipping its hat to the Bolivarian revolutionary process under way in Venezuela and other Latin American countries. What are the broad lessons we can take away from the French experience? For one thing, the protests and strikes, and the organizing that made them possible, show that resignation, panic and 'everyone for themselves' are not the only possible responses to the onset of economic hard times. While people will often respond in a conservative and individualist manner at the onset of a crisis, there comes a time when they realize that systemic issues are at play and that only broad, collective action and political alternatives will do. For another, the party and trade-union organizations of the traditional Left are too weakened and compromised by years of adaptation to neoliberalism and dependence on positions in parliament and the state to respond to the challenges thrown up by the hard-Right and the economic crisis. While rightly associated with a range of measures of socio-economic progress, the post-war mediations between the organized working classes, their party, trade-union and social-movement representation and the state itself were never ideal; but after 25 years of neoliberalism they have ceased even to be operative for some time now. In France, repeated waves of mass protest and organizing over the past 13 years have failed to halt the traditional Left's drift toward the Blairite 'centre-Left.' As the Right and ruling elites toy with various ineffective solutions to the crisis, the forces of the 'centre-Left' will be quick to latch on to the handful of 'stimulus' and ersatz 'Keynesian' measures that are thrown into the mix to artfully declare a major breach in the neoliberal fortress. So the crisis is just as likely to deepen the rightward trend of the traditional Left and 'centre-Left' as it is to push these forces in a more radical and combative direction. The new days of action in France provide further confirmation of this analysis. While they could not have occurred without trade-union unity at the top, this unity 'from above' came about in response to pressure 'from below' and simultaneously acts as a trammel on the further development of the current movement. The pressure 'from below' has itself been the result of a surprising and noteworthy development -- the confluence of a substantial segment of public opinion with radical sectors scattered across traditional and new trade-union groupings, local workplace and activist campaigns, the student and international-solidarity movements and the relatively small party-political organizations of the radical Left. How a 'radical Left' can get a wide hearing And this brings us to the particular significance of the NPA. It is as much a product of this surprising confluence of forces as it is a vital ingredient in ensuring that the present unity and momentum are not lost in the face of hard-Right intransigence and 'centre-Left' weakness and perfidy. In other words, the debate on political strategy and organization now occupies centre stage; and the main lesson of the NPA's undeniable success is that a radical-Left political project can both receive a sympathetic hearing and play this strategically essential unifying and galvanizing role, on condition that: 1. Its message consistently targets the systemic origins of the crisis and identifies those responsible for bringing us to the brink of economic and ecological calamity. 2. It contains an iron-clad commitment to the broadest unity 'in the streets' of all forces willing to oppose the right-wing agenda, overall and on an issue-by-issue basis. 3. It confidently enters the electoral, institutional and media fray but strikes a position of defiance and strict independence on the question of electoral and governmental agreements and alliances with the forces of the traditional 'Left' and 'centre-Left' (not to mention centre-Right forces such as those around Francois Bayrou in France and the Liberal Party here in Canada). These forces are beyond redemption as any kind of credible vehicle for popular aspirations and seek to govern at all costs -- in practice along lines that vary only slightly from those of the Right and hard-Right. 4. It prioritizes work among those sectors of the population and country ignored or abandoned by the traditional institutions of the 'Left' and 'centre-Left.' The NPA has, for example, made a priority of organizing in the working-class and immigrant areas that have been hit hard by neoliberal structuring and were the backdrop of the banlieues revolt of late 2005. This is why the topics of racism and the precarious work imposed on young people figure prominently in the NPA's internal discussions. 5. It aims to be a grassroots force, rooted in the actual struggles and debates of workers and young people, eschewing any kind of elitist, rigid and hyper-activist model of organizing and transformation, throwing its doors wide open to seasoned activists and interested newcomers alike, while creating a democratic and transparent framework for collective discussion, decision-making, action and the drawing of balance-sheets. 6. It takes a long-term approach to its project of social and political transformation and understands that we are in an extended period of resistance and development of alternatives to capitalism and imperialism. While history and politics always have surprises in store, especially in a period of deep crisis such as now, the relationship of forces is too unfavourable, and the vision of an alternative too weak, to expect major breakthroughs on an institutional level in the near term. Better to understand this and get down to the serious work of organizing and rethinking than to feed technocratic and armchair illusions about quick fixes and imminent elite-level 'paradigm shifts.' A new generation's New Left Finally, the protest movements in France and the birth of the NPA inaugurate a new chapter in the life of the international radical Left, especially when viewed in tandem with the developments of recent years in Latin America. The fact that the main figure associated with events in France was born in the mid-1970s also signals the emergence of a new generation of radicals. We had a whiff of this trend during the wave of anti-globalization protests ushered in by the Battle of Seattle in 1999. But now it appears to be asserting itself much more forcefully, with a larger and more receptive audience than the one that existed just a short time ago. This, too, is a tremendously important and encouraging development. Nathan Rao attended the founding convention of the NPA in Paris earlier this year. He lives in Toronto and is a supporter of the Socialist Project. He welcomes comments at natrao99@gmail.com.

France: Towards the foundation of a New Anti-Capitalist Party

by Grant Morgan 28 November 2008 An informative article about the formation of France's New Anti-Capitalist Party appears below. It is penned by respected French socialist Pierre Rousset, a leader of the left since the 1968 student revolt and general strike which almost overthrew the De Gaulle regime. After an outline of decades of failed attempts at bringing about "radical left unity" in France, Rousset outlines the apparently successful rise of a broad left party over the last 18 months. He points to a key element in this success: a bottom-up (rather than a "top-bottom") approach which taps into a general yearning for an independent left challenge to the Socialist Party, France's equivalent to the New Zealand Labour Party. It seems there are important similarities (as well as differences, of course) between the political situation of France and New Zealand. In New Zealand, a bottom-up strategy of "going to the masses" with a plan to protect the people from economic crisis by rolling back the market may well be the formative impulse for the rise of a strong broad left party.

Towards the foundation of a New Anti-Capitalist Party

by Pierre Rousset from LINKS - International Journal of Socialist Renewal The political impact of the New Anti-Capitalist Party (Nouveau Parti anticapitaliste or NPA) process is quite important. In a number places, this new political party in construction is already de facto replacing the French Revolutionary Communist League (Ligue communiste révolutionnaire or LCR)and is very active.

Continue

France: Capitalist crisis and mass strike set scene for NPA

by Sam Wainwright from Green Left Weekly 14 February 2009 On the weekend of February 7-8, over 600 delegates and as many observers attended the founding conference of France's New Anti-capitalist Party (NPA), held at la Plaine-Saint-Denis in the working class suburbs to the north of Paris. Less than a week before, on January 29; around 2.5 million people took to the streets across the country as part of a nationwide strike against the efforts of the government of Nicolas Sarkozy to foist the burden of the capitalist economic crisis on to working people. The idea for the organisation was publicly proposed in August 2007 in the wake of the country's presidential and legislative elections by Olivier Besancenot, the presidential candidate of the Revolutionary Communist League (LCR). Since then 465 regional committees in support of the project were launched and over nine thousand people have joined. Besancenot's score of 4.7% surpassed that of the once mighty French Communist Party's (PCF) candidate, and with his engaging and straight talking style established his party as the most recognised and authentic anti-capitalist voice in French politics. Widely rated as France's most popular politician, "the Postie" as even the media call him recorded a 54% satisfaction rating in the latest opinion polls, his highest since the election. Besancenot's strong showing in the last two presidential elections was the immediate catalyst for the formation of the NPA; however its origins lie more deeply in important transformations in French politics over the last decade. Firstly beginning with a massive public sector strike in late 1995, there have been regular waves of struggles by French workers resisting the attempts by the employers and governments to impose the worldwide model of cut backs, casualisation and privatisation. While these struggles have been defensive and only partially successful, they have been sufficient to keep alive the traditions of struggle, left wing ideas and renew layer after layer of activists. Despite the massive rejection of the cut-back agenda by the working class, the traditional or "institutional" parties of the left have faithfully tried to implement the neo-liberal austerity program. The working class fight-back used to put something of a brake on the Socialist Party (PS), but it is now increasingly embracing the Tony Blair model. Furthermore the PS has very effectively drawn both the PCF and the Greens into its web, offering them cabinet posts (when it is in government, and still at the regional level); and electoral deals in return for their support. Their integration into PS governments has eroded the PCF's once significant base among blue collar workers and in the case of the Greens, their image as something as fresh and radical. In fact without the PS electoral deals both parties would struggle to win any national deputies. In this context the LCR tripled in size since 1995 to over three thousand members and already regrouped nearly all of France's far left, save some very schematic and dogmatic groups. It also started to develop a significant base in some of the country's industrial heartlands that had once been the sole domain of the PCF. However the LCR recognised that there existed a much wider audience for a resolutely anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, pro-worker and pro-environment political force; including many people from different political traditions such as former members of the PCF, and even more people without any previous political identification. The NPA is an attempt to reach out to those people. To guarantee the success of the NPA the LCR decided it had to completely dissolve into it; firstly to demonstrate to the rest of the NPA membership that it would be one united party of equals, and secondly to allow for new and fluid debate to take place in the new organisation. As long time former leader of the LCR Pierre Rousset explained, "One of the worst things the LCR could bring into the NPA would be its old debates." On February 5 the LCR, born of a fusion between a current of French Trotskyism and some of the leaders of the student protest movement of May-June 1968, held its last ever congress. Alain Krivine, a central leader of May-June 68 and founder of the LCR who did time in prison when the organisation was banned in the early 70s, was joined by other members of his generation at the front for an emotional rendition of the Internationale at the congress close. But the tears did not last long. The next day as the NPA congress began delegates spontaneously rose to their feet to chant "All together, all togetherŠGeneral strike!" before getting down to the practical business of adopting the raft of founding principles, policy and structures needed for the new party. As was predicted the new party decided to retain its provisional name. Plenty would admit that it was not perfect; it does not express what the party is for and how long can it keep calling itself new? However the name has already started to stick and has a resonance in a country where there are already parties carrying the name socialist and communist who are not anti-capitalist! Exciting as much interest, especially among the capitalist media, was the NPA's policy regarding possible electoral alliances in the upcoming elections to the European parliament. While these are conducted on a proportional basis, a ticket has to cross the 10% threshold to qualify for representation. Neither the NPA, the PCF nor the newly formed Left Party (PG) are likely to get this by themselves. As primarily electoral organisations both the PCF and PG were frantic that the NPA agree to deal. Congress delegates were presented with two counter-posed positions regarding the European elections. The position presented by the commission established for drafting policy on the matter declared that the NPA should be open to running on a joint ticket with these parties (and others) but on the basis of first reaching agreement on some basic common policy including an agreement not to take posts PS pro-capitalist administrations. However the PCF, while it tries to distance itself from the PS come election time, is addicted to the trappings of office and it's quite unlikely that it will break from this orientation. An amendment from members in the Clermont-Ferrand region proposed that the NPA accept in principle a joint ticket with the PCF and PG, with the precise basis of the agreement to be worked out later. However the amendment was overwhelmingly rejected, only winning the support of 16% of the delegates. For commentators in the capitalist media this was proof of the NPA's "immature" refusal to accept the "responsibility to govern". Is this a sign that the capitalist media may turn against France's favourite postman and try to transform him from charming idealist into dangerous villain? Already there has been an aborted attempt to tar him with a bogus allegation of workplace harassment. Last year listening devices were discovered in Besancenot's home. The boss of company that imports taser guns is currently being tried over the affair! Besancenot couldn't move around the conference without being followed by a media pack, yet the same media then try to diminish the NPA as little more than a media creation at his whim. However the NPA is moving rapidly to broaden its image and promote its other spokespeople. In any case the capitalist media may well find that the regeneration of the anti-capitalist left has surpassed such intrigue as the economic crisis deepens hardening opinion against the Sarkozy government. Sam Wainwright is a Co-convenor of the Socialist Alliance in Western Australia and attended both the LCR and NPA congresses as an invited observer.

France: Coming together 'to build a party of struggle and mobilisation'

26 March 2008 from LINKS. Interview with the LCR's Olivier Besancenot, conducted by the Swiss revolutionary socialist newspaper SolidaritéS SolidaritéS: Is there in the history of the French or international workers' movement precedents for the construction of a new "anti-capitalist party", as initiated by the LCR congress? Besancenot: We do not claim to be inventing anything. But it's true, this project is rather unique. First, it is unusual for a political organisation that has not been discredited -- and has even experienced some success -­ to pose the problem of its disappearance! Of course, this is not about assessing the profit and losses of the history of the political current that the LCR represents. But instead, to write a new page, with others. With many others. And neither is it about a merger between political movements, even if we are ready to discuss with all those who might be interested in this project. In fact, this project is based on an analysis of a new situation, in particular the extent of the crisis of the workers' movement. And on the idea that it is both urgent and possible to take a giant step. This is urgent because of the violent attacks from the employers and the emptiness of the institutional left. This is possible because, despite the points scored by the MEDEF (Mouvement des Entreprises de France, an employers' organisation) and the right, the popular layers still show remarkable abilities of resistance and there is an expectation of something new. The [proposed] new party aims to integrate currents from various traditions of the radical left. Does this integration have as its condition an explicit discussion on the legacy of these traditions, or can it only be done through practice and the convergence of concrete struggles? The discussion on the various ideological and historical "legacies'' can be interesting. It will also undoubtedly be long. But we cannot start with that! Especially since the objective is to bring together men and women who, rightly, do not have a long history of party political commitment and do not identify with any of these traditions particularly. One of the main reasons - although not the only one - for the failure of previous attempts to bring together the various anti-capitalist currents is that there was a "top down'' approach and that inevitably came up against the past of various people, their old differences. This time, we will try to do it differently. And starting from common practices, all the resistance struggles that bring us together on a daily basis. And that, in outline, sketches the contours of a radical and revolutionary change in society. What will be the attitude of the new party towards existing political institutions? Does it, for example, intend to take part in the management of local councils or regions, as part of alliances with other left-wing parties or independently? Participating in institutions and management is not a matter of principle. The social liberals and their allies accuse us of now wishing to "get our hands dirty'' with political responsibilities. That is not correct. We are not simple "witnesses''; our goal is to participate in the implementation of measures and policies that we defend. But not to serve as a left cover for social liberal policies! And herein lies the basic problem, and what differentiates us from many "anti-neoliberal'' currents, we have no plans to participate in a coalition (with the Socialist Party), which "in power'' applies during the week ... the very policies which we demonstrate against at the weekend! The Greens and particularly the Communist Party of France (PCF) tried, a few years ago, under the Jospin government. With the results that we know, they were ... politically discredited. Imposing - as we advocate - the redistribution of wealth in favour of the vast majority of the people who produce it by their labour will inevitably lead to confrontation with the small minority that currently scoops it up. This means a real relationship of forces in society ... not just in the institutions. Will the new party be a revolutionary party, like the LCR, and if so what meaning does this word have in the current context? Revolutionary and "revolutionary like the LCR''? Probably not. Otherwise, we could merely continue with the LCR as before, but better obviously! We need of course, a common basis: the defence of radical proposals, opposition to the capitalist system, a strong commitment to mobilisations, political independence from the Socialist Party. This common platform will not answer *a priori* any questions, tactical or strategic. Some will remain open. But we believe that there are tens of thousands of men and women who are available to build a party of struggle and mobilisation. A left that is not afraid to face down the attacks from the right and the renunciation of the left. A new political representative for the workers, young people and victims of oppression. A left that does not confine its ambitions to limiting the damage of capitalist globalisation, but which wants to do away with the system and radically change society. And, indeed, change society! On these tens of thousands of men and women who are ready, like us to "revolutionise society'', we do not impose our past, whether the general history of Trotskyism or the specific history of the LCR. But put them together to build something new! Olivier Besancenot is a political bureau member of the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire (LCR -- Revolutionary Communist League), French section of the Fourth International. As the LCR's presidential candidate in 2002 and 2007, he achieve 1.2 million votes (4.5%) and 1.5 million votes (4.2%), respectively. This interview was conducted by Razmig Keucheyan during the 17th congress of the LCR, held in Plaine-Saint-Denis from January 24-27, 2008. A version of this interview also appears in International Viewpoint at http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1451

France: Towards the foundation of a New Anti-Capitalist Party

by Pierre Rousset from LINKS - International Journal of Socialist Renewal The political impact of the New Anti-Capitalist Party (Nouveau Parti anticapitaliste or NPA) process is quite important. In a number places, this new political party in construction is already de facto replacing the French Revolutionary Communist League (Ligue communiste révolutionnaire or LCR)and is very active. In June 2007, the LCR launched an appeal for the constitution of a New Anti-Capitalist Party. In June 2008, 1000 delegates met in Paris to give a national-scale dimension to a process which started from the bottom. At the beginning of November 2008, delegates from some 400 committees gathered again to discuss three documents: programmatic references, political orientation, statutes and functioning of the NPA. Around 10,000 activists are presently engaged in the founding process of the NPA – three times more than the total membership of the LCR. On November 6, 2008 it held its first public meeting in Paris with more than 2000 participants. If everything goes as planned, on January 29, 2009, the LCR at its last congress will decide on its own dissolution. The following days, January 30-February 1, 2009, at its first congress, the NPA will be constituted. So far, so good. What is striking is how fast this overall process proceeds. It obviously answers a political need. This need, this opportunity, has been felt for sometime already, but, in the last 10 years, all previous attempts to build a qualitatively broader anti-capitalist party in France failed. To overcome these failures, the LCR decided to try something new – so new it even never envisaged it before. What then is “new” in the process of constitution of the New Anti-Capitalist Party? After all other scenarios failed… Because of the key role played by the LCR in the launching of the NPA, it maybe useful to look back on how this organisation in the past saw the building of a socially broadly rooted revolutionary party. I speak here from the experience of my “fading away” generation (the May 1968 one) which is no longer “in command” in the LCR or the NPA, but whose historical legacy has to be taken into account precisely to analyse what is “new”. I’ll present our past “visions” it in a very brief, simplified and schematic way. My generation created new, dynamic, radical organisations in the 1960s – but, in France, we remained very small. In the late '60s-early '70s, we thought we had no choice because key class confrontations were to come soon: the new revolutionary party had to be built quickly, in the heat of the crisis, through intense activism. In the mid-'70s, we had to admit that the pace of history would be much slower than expected and that the mass-based revolutionary party will have to be built in the long run. The LCR never thought this party would simply be the result of its own quantitative growth. It had to be the outcome of a much broader process of “recomposition”, restructuring of the left and labour movement. We envisaged three main scenarios: 1. First schema: the radicalisation of whole sections, of wings, of existing mass working-class parties (the Socialist party -- SP -- and the Communist Party -- PCF). We can maybe say that this schema was shaped in Italy with the creation of the Party of the Communist Refoundation when the old CP became social-democratic. But it was not the case in France. The main split from the SP (around Jean-Pierre Chevènement) became “left-nationalist” and declined, becoming irrelevant. The long-lasting crisis of the PCF never gave birth to anything looking like what happened in Italy. Our “old left” proved incapable of rejuvenating, even in part. 2. Second schema: the launching of a new radical working-class party by the trade unions with the participation of existing revolutionary groups. That is the “Brazilian schema” – the original foundation of the Workers Party (PT) – or, more recently, the South Korean process: the KCTU trade union centre has backed the creation of the Democratic Labour Party (DLP). In both cases, the trade union movement was still “young”, having reorganised itself after a period of military dictatorship. In France, the main trade union centres (CGT, CFDT, FO) show no such dynamism. 3. Third schema: two or three significant political groups join together to build a new party. This happened in Portugal (Left Bloc) or Denmark (Red-Green Alliance). It was the simplest and the most “credible” of all scenarios – but it nevertheless did not work in France. Contrary to the LCR, the two other main far left organisations coming from the 1960s radicalisation have never been interested in rallying various radical forces around a common political project (unlike in Portugal, for example). An important political opening existed nevertheless after the victory in 2005 of the “no” in the referendum on the draft European (neoliberal and militaristic) constitution. A powerful aspiration for political unity in the “left of the left” then expressed – but failed after two years of intense negotiations involving a range of currents going from the PCF to the LCR. This last attempt ended in bitterness and harsh polemics between components of this two-year process on who was responsible for its ultimate failure. But rather than looking for culprits, it is better to reflect on why the three above-mentioned scenarios failed in France in spite decades of successive attempts. In, again, a very schematic way, I would like to underline the following factors: The “old” political and labour movement does not anymore have the potential to rejuvenate a radical left. The social roots of the SP have changed and its “social-liberal” orientation expresses the depth of its integration into the bourgeois society. The PCF has never truly addressed the issue of its Stalinist past and now finds itself electorally and institutionally hostage of the SP: for years now it has been in crisis – and it is unfortunately a “crisis without dynamism''. The three main trade union confederations (CGT, CFDT, FO) are too bureaucratised. This does not mean that individuals (even many) or local activist teams from the “old” labour movement are not and will not join the NPA or another radical left party – indeed, quite a number are! But it means that, unlike what we hoped in the 1970s-1980s, it will not be enough to “recompose” (“restructure”) the traditional labour movement. It has to be remoulded in a broader way –– which is something much more complex! The “new” trade unions (Solidaires…) and social movements have a much greater radical potential. Many of their activists are reacting positively to the call for the NPA. Some members of their leaderships did engage in the attempts to build, in 2005-2007, political unity in the “left of the left”. But the relationship between social movements and political parties remains in France very uneasy. The independence of trade unions and mass organisations is today a very sensitive issue – and mostly for good reasons given past experiences! Radical parties such as the NPA have to show in a consistent way their usefulness and their readiness to keep respectful relationships with “mass organisations”, for a new mutual dynamics to better shape in the future. 'Left of the left' It is difficult to describe what the French “left of the left” is made of, because few of its components are politically well delineated. The PCF is by far its biggest component but is in deep crisis. The LCR is by far the biggest component of the “far left” involved in unity processes. Then there are smaller political organisations, informal networks, local teams, individual activists or “personalities”… the whole constituting a “milieu”, broader than a coalition of parties. There are many reasons explaining why the 2005-2006 attempts to build unity around common electoral candidates ended in fragmentation. But there is one major political issue which has to be kept in mind here: the relationships with the Socialist Party, electoral alliances and governmental participation. This is a key issue in a number of countries where electoral blocs and governmental participation has been or will be a concrete choice for the radical left: Brazil, West Bengal, Italy, Germany, Portugal, the Netherlands. In France, the electoral system is very undemocratic: to have any chance of being elected to parliament, one needs the backing of the SP (on the left) – which is not given for free. Weakened, the PCF needs all the more to negotiate an agreement with the SP to save its electoral positions. Those who want to ally with the PCF have to accept it. But for the LCR (and others), the task of the day is to strengthen a radical left pole able to incarnate an alternative in the left to social-liberalism – which implies a total independence from the SP. That has been and remains a major political line of demarcation. Late 2006, the LCR seemed very isolated within the “left of the left”. Early 2007, for the presidential election, Marie-George Buffet run for the PCF, Olivier Besancenot for the LCR and José Bové for some other components of the “left of the left”. Besancenot’s campaign was politically very dynamic and he got more than 4% of the votes. There was no such dynamics in Buffet’s campaign and she got less than 2% (a historically low figure for the PCF!). Bové’s campaign was politically confused and had little impact. In spite of his own personal notoriety, he hardly got more than 1%. After two years of intense debates on orientation, the presidential election was a real political test for the “left of the left”. It gave new responsibilities to the LCR. The new responsibilities of the LCR With the success of its political initiative and electoral campaign, the LCR found itself at the centre stage of the “left of the left”. The question was thus: what to do of this success? The LCR had the responsibility to take an initiative quickly, for the existing momentum not to be lost (as happened in the past). In mid-2007, even after the political test of the elections, there was no possibility to reach an agreement with other significant organisations for launching a new anti-capitalist party. With no “top-bottom” unity call possible, the LCR decided to impulse a “bottom-top” process – something which it never envisaged before. Everyone ready to participate in the creation of a new anti-capitalist party clearly independent from the SP was invited to join local committees for the NPA. The network of committees would constitute the foundation of the new party. It was clear that there was an open political space for a radical party qualitatively broader than the LCR to emerge. This was in part shown by the extraordinary popularity of Olivier Besancenot. Olivier is a very good candidate and spokesperson. This is not mainly a “media” phenomenon. Being a postie, he is not seen as a professional politician but as a “co-worker” (“one of us”). He is young, and the youth can also identify with him. Last but not the least, he is politically very consistent: when at 27 years old he first ran in a presidential campaign (in 2002), he was totally unknown but already a member of the political bureau of the LCR. In TV forums, he usually smashes politically professional politicians and members of the government. People love it! One reason why the LCR has been able to take the initiative of launching the NPA is often overlooked. Its leadership has been renewed. Today, all the historical “figures” of the LCR have stepped out of the politbureau (but remain active!), and the national leadership is now mostly composed of cadres in their 30s and 40s. This seems not to be the case for most other organisations. It is a very important issue because of the radical change of political generation, which occurred since the 1990s. On one hand, the LCR renewed its membership and cadre network. On the other, the LCR remains an organisation framed by its origins – the 1960s-1970s' experience. So it both can and must impulse the creation of a new party, rooted in the present generation outlook. The NPA as a NEW party For the LCR, the aim is not only to build a bigger, stronger party. It is to help the creation of a truly new one. There has been a radical change of period, with the disintegration of USSR and with capitalist globalisation. And there has been a radical shift in generation: present activists do not have the same references and the same background of historical experiences than the “1968” ones. The combination of the two radical changes (period and generation) has deep consequences in the way politics is lived. For sure, it is important to keep alive the political experience of the past decades, the many lessons of the past century (imperialism, Stalinism …). How then to build anew without losing our past? By passing the legacy of the LCR on a new party. By bringing also into this new party the best of other revolutionary traditions of the past century – from various Marxist or libertarian traditions, from feminist and eco-socialist movements, etc. By giving to the new party the social roots of trained mass cadres, while broadening its social implantation with the recent experience of the Global Justice Movement and the wave of resistance in populous suburbs, among migrants, etc. By allowing also the new party to speak the political language of the present generation. The will to build with others a broader anti-capitalist party is not new for the LCR, it aimed at it for several decades! What is new is the decision to impulse a “bottom-top” process and, most importantly, to fully integrate the change of period and generation in the vision of the new party. Unfortunately, the LCR is presently the only “big” (everything is relative) component of the “left of the left” engaged in the NPA process. The other concerned political groups are much smaller. The danger then was that the LCR would remain “the party within the party” after the foundation of the NPA. To avoid that, drastic decisions were taken. LCR members are usually in minority in steering bodies of the de facto existing NPA. And the LCR should dissolve itself the days before the founding congress of the NPA. The NPA has to become a political and social melting pot, to shape its own identity. It is presently easy to reach political agreements within the NPA process and there is nothing divisive today as the “nature of USSR” (to take an example) was for the “left of the left” in the 1970s. But there are strategic issues with little concrete answers (how to disarm the bourgeoisie?). The NPA will have to consolidate its programmatic foundations through its own experience. It will take time. The road ahead is unknown. The decision to dissolve the LCR is of course a risky one. But it would be even more risky not to take this risk. We have to seize the present opportunity: to miss it would probably be very costly for the whole “left of the left”. The NPA must not be seen as – and must not be – an “enlarged LCR”, but a qualitatively newer party. The process is well engaged. Thousands of people who were never member of a party before are involving. Many coming from the PCF or other organisations are joining too, as well as grassroots activists. If the launching of the NPA end of January 2009 is a success, some political components which are presently not ready to unite with the LCR may change their mind. But it may be better to wait for the end of January 2009 and the founding congress of the NPA to evaluate the long way we’ll have come – and the long way still ahead. This article first appeared on the website of International Viewpoint, magazine of the Fourth International. It will appear in a future issue of Amandla. Pierre Rousset is a member of Europe Solidaire Sans Frontiers (ESSF). He has been involved for many years in Asian solidarity movements.

Letter from France

Letter from France

by Olivier Besancenot, June 2007

The severe electoral defeat of the left doesn't automatically mean a social defeat, argues Olivier Besancenot of the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire (LCR).

The election of Nicolas Sarkozy as president is a major event in French politics. For the first time since 1981 the political team in office has not been defeated in a general election, either presidential or parliamentary. It is the victory of a very hard right wing party whose programme was at the same time excessively neoliberal and excessively reactionary - many of its themes being borrowed from the far right and neo-fascist speeches.

One of the main reasons for this success is that Sarkozy has provided a very offensive and clear message while Ségolène Royal, the candidate of the social-liberal Socialist Party (SP), was unable to propose a different programme. A significant part of her campaign was about subsidies for small - and even big - business, "fair order", the French national flag and hymn, repression against youngsters, and so on. After the first round of the election, she even tried to propose a coalition with François Bayrou, the candidate of the centre-right.

Now the perspective is to organise the resistance against the coming attacks of the new government against workers, young people and immigrants in a situation worse than ever. But on the other side, since 1995, the left and the social movements have been able to resist and counterattack. This severe electoral defeat doesn't automatically mean a social defeat.

The main problem is the situation of the French left. The SP has been defeated and is now faced with a major crisis. Many leaders are trying to change the orientation of the party to move it into a centre-left party, very similar to New Labour or, eventually, similar to the Italian coalition supporting Romano Prodi.

Its various satellites have been severely defeated up to the point that their existence as independent parties is now threatened. The Communist Party (CP) is now at under 2 percent of the vote and is deeply divided, some of its elected members being more or less seduced by a closer alliance with the SP.

The presidential election has been a complete disaster for the Greens as they got only 1.5 percent. But the crisis has also reached the anti-neoliberal left as a whole. The attempt of José Bové, former leader of the Peasants Confederation and well known activist of the global justice movement, to regroup the anti-neoliberal left despite the "sectarianism of the apparatus of the CP and the LCR" has been a complete failure, he received 1.3 percent of the vote. Between the two rounds of the presidential election, he even accepted a "mission" for Ségolène Royal about "food sovereignty", leaving his supporters rather disoriented.

The political approach of the LCR for this election had been frequently criticised. But, finally, as a candidate of LCR, I was the only candidate on the left of the SP able to resist the pressure of the vote in favour of Royal.

I reached nearly the same result as in 2002 (one and a half million votes representing 4.1 percent of the vote) and 300,000 more votes were received. Was it because I'm a smart guy? No, it was for more substantial reasons. I defended a clear political orientation in favour of social and democratic emergency measures.

I have tried to speak to the new emerging political generation, in public schools, popular suburbs and workplaces. And the LCR was 100 percent independent from the SP. That's the main explanation.

This was exactly the reason why it has been impossible to build a broader anti-neoliberal coalition supporting a common candidate, as the other parties and movements that had successfully gathered against the EU Constitution were at least ambiguous about the kind of relationship you can have with the SP.

Independence is nowadays the main challenge the anti-capitalist left is faced with in France, in Europe and elsewhere. Now the LCR has new and huge responsibilities because it is the only French left organisation which "survived" the disaster and will eventually be able to take initiatives in order to regroup the left on a radical and independent basis. That issue will be the central one for our next national congress, in December 2007.

LCR clear winners on hard left in French Presidental elections

	Voix	% Exprimés
M. Olivier BESANCENOT	1 498 835	4,08
Mme Marie-George BUFFET	707 327	1,93
M. Gérard SCHIVARDI	123 711	0,34
M. François BAYROU	6 820 914	18,57
M. José BOVÉ	483 076	1,32
Mme Dominique VOYNET	576 758	1,57
M. Philippe de VILLIERS	818 704	2,23
Mme Ségolène ROYAL	9 501 295	25,87
M. Frédéric NIHOUS	420 775	1,15
M. Jean-Marie LE PEN	3 835 029	10,44
Mme Arlette LAGUILLER	488 119	1,33
M. Nicolas SARKOZY	11 450 302	31,18

Besancenot won 1.5 million votes (4.11%), up from 1.2 million in 2002. http://www.lcr-rouge.org/

Arlette Laguiller, of Lutte Ouvrière, slipped back from 5.7% to just 1.3%, just under half a million votes.

The election was most notable for the relative failure of far-right candidate Jean-Marie le Pen, who surprisingly came second in the 2002 contest. He fell from nearly 17% last time out to just 10.4%.

Undoubtedly, an important blow to the far-left's score was dealt by the desire on the part of most French workers that the Parti Socialiste (social democrat) candidate should get into the second round, and thus avoid a repeat of 2002, when they were faced with a choice between conservative Jacques Chirac and le Pen. That crisis was widely blamed on the splitting of the left vote among numerous candidates. This time, the PS candidate Ségolène Royal (25.8%) did indeed qualify for the second round, where she will face right-winger Nicolas Sarkozy (31.4%).

The collective score of the groups to the left of the PS - if we also factor in the semi-Stalinist PCF (Communist Party), the "Lambertiste" (anti-EU and pseudo-Trotskyist) Gerard Schivardi and anti-globalisation peasant leader José Bové - was about 9%, down from 14% in 2002.

Given the circumstance of a resurgent Parti Socialiste and continuing disunity of Trotskyist forces, the LCR's performance was impressive. Not only did it win more votes than ever - the first occasion on which it had won more votes than Lutte Ouvrière - it ran a strong, visible campaign, its meetings with Besancenot apparently twice as large as in 2002.

Coverage of the elections has been dominated by the two leading candidates – right wing UMP candidate Nicholas Sarkozy and Socialist Party contester Ségolène Royal.

Sarkozy made a name for himself during the 2005 riots in French suburbs when, as interior minister, he launched a disgusting attack on the rioters, calling them “scum”.

He was also responsible for sending riot police into the Sorbonne and other universities to break up last year’s student occupations against the CPE employment law.

Sarkozy has continued this right wing agenda through the election campaign.

Last week he denounced “uncontrolled immigration” into France and argued that young people who commit suicide and paedophiles are genetically programmed to such behaviour.

Tellingly, the Financial Times reported this week that Gordon Brown had “clicked” with Sarkozy when they met in London earlier this year.

Ségolène Royal has pitched her campaign as a break with the old forms of elections – presenting herself as a new type of modern candidate appealing directly to the people.

In reality, Royal is committed to neoliberal policies. Last year she expressed her support for Tony Blair. She has zigzagged throughout the campaign, being forced to talk left at times and at others following Sarkozy’s agenda.

Backdrop

The real backdrop to the elections are the struggles that have shaken the political terrain in France over the last few years.

In May 2005, a referendum saw a majority vote against the EU constitution. The “no” committees united opposition to neoliberalism. Many members and supporters of the Socialist Party voted no, in opposition to their own party leadership.

In autumn 2005 riots in the suburbs of Paris spread to many other cities. Hundreds of young people were involved, angry at years of poverty, police repression, racism and unemployment.

In March 2006 protests and strikes defeated the government’s proposed CPE employment law that would have reduced rights for young workers.

These struggles, along with fears that fascist candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen could repeat his performance of 2002 and reach the second round of the election, have led significant numbers to register to vote for the first time.

Outside the bankruptcy of Sarkozy and Royal there is a different campaign taking place.

The presidential campaign by Olivier Besancenot, the candidate for the LCR (Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire) is expressing the spirit of the resistance of the past few years.

Under the slogan “our lives are worth more than their profits”, Besancenot is drawing in new forces from across France.

Besancenot is a postal worker. He was the youngest ever French presidential candidate when he stood, aged 28, in the 2002 elections winning 1.3 million votes – 4.25 percent.

He is currently touring France speaking at large, young and enthusiastic public rallies, as well as meeting groups of workers in dispute and other campaigners.

Recent campaign meetings include 1,500 in Bordeaux, 500 in Valence – where the meeting was also addressed by workers from the Reynolds pen factory who are fighting redundancy – and 800 in Clermont-Ferrand in central France.

Besancenot also spoke in Corsica for the first time last week, addressing a meeting of 100 in the town of Calvi and 450 in Ajaccio.

It is clear that Besancenot’s campaign is capturing the mood of opposition to neoliberalism and the anger at racism and insecurity felt by many.

In the polls he has been at least two percentage points clear of other left candidates such as Marie-George Buffet of the Communist Party, Lutte Ouvriere’s candidate Arlette Laguiller and anti-globalisation activist José Bové, who is standing as an independent left candidate.

His lead over the Communist Party is significant as it was once the strongest party in France and has long dominated the left.

Statement from Olivier Besancenot

Nearly 1.5 million voters rallied around my candidacy. That's 280,000 more than in 2002.

Despite the pressure to cast a "useful vote" - which during recent weeks has proven to be Segolene Royal's sole programme - more than 4.5% of voters have voted for me. This is real encouragement for the struggles ahead. Thanks to those who have voted for me. Together, we have succeeded in this campaign, apart from our tally of votes, by offering an answer to social problems. For the right to employment, increasing purchasing power and, furthermore, the right to housing - the minimum wage up to 1500 euros a month, a 300 euro pay rise in all salaries [monthly], requisitioning all empty homes, prohibiting redundancies and mounting a struggle against discrimination - so many questions still existent in society and the world of work; so many mobilisations to come to make our voice heard.

Nicolas Sarkozy is ahead, and has qualified to face Segolene Royal in the second round. The right has for five years led a policy of systematic destruction of the social rights we have won, and Sarkozy now wants to inflict MEDEF [French CBI] shock-therapy to French society. That is to say, more inequality, more injustice and fewer rights. Le Pen has been kicked out of the race, which is great news. But Sarkozy has led an extremely reactionary campaign. Running on the terrain of the Front National [Le Pen's party], this man and his programme pose an immediate danger.

No candidate has ownership of the votes [he's won], and everyone is, evidently, free to make their choice on 6th May [the second round]. But for 5 years the LCR has fought the policies of Chirac and his prime ministers in the street and at the ballot box. It's in that vein that I call on you to demonstrate on May 1st in every town in France for the important social policy changes that I have fought for in this campaign, and against the anti-social project of Sarkozy. Against this confident right wing, the second round necessarily has the character of an anti-Sarkozy referendum for all of those who want to resist his politics. On the 6th of May we will be with those who want to stop Sarkozy becoming president. That doesn't mean supporting Segolene Royal, but voting against Nicolas Sarkozy.

Faced with this hard right, the Parti Socialiste and its candidate are not up to the task. Throughout this campaign I have fought for redistribution of wealth. That is not the plan of the PS, which puts itself on the same political territory as the right in accepting neo-liberalism and seeking profits for big business. Even on questions like nationalism and patriotism, the PS has sought to rival the right. That's why the LCR does not support Segolene Royal.

I call upon those who have sympathised with our propositions to work together so we can together creat a force able to fight for them in mobilisation. Whoever is president after the May 6th vote, we must continue to fight neo-liberal policies, and the LCR will continue to work for the greatest unity in the coming struggles. That, whether or not Sarkozy unfortunately wins on May 6th; but equally if Royal is elected, she must face opposition from the left and not only on the right.

We need a new anti-capitalist force. To help, as we have in the last five years, struggle and resistance, in supporting the new political generation which grew up in the mobilisation against the CPE, in the suburbs and in the workplace. The LCR calls on you [to help us] together construct this force, able to fight capitalism and offer the hope that another world is possible.

Statement from Arlette Laguiller

Firstly, I must thank all those who have voted for and supported me for their conscience and their confidence in me. As had been obvious, it is Sarkozy and Royal who will compete in the second round. The fear of seeing Bayrou or Le Pan beating Royal was never seriously entertained, except to aggressively push from the first round the idea of a "useful vote" [for Royal].

As regards the past, I do not regret - far from it, I am proud of it - having been the only candidate to refuse in 2002 to call for a vote for one right-winger over another, and having refused to vote for Chirac; Chirac the ally of Sarkozy. Doing that to defeat Le Pen, who had hardly won many votes in the first round and got through to the second because Jospin [PS], thanks to his politics, had lost two and a half million of his supporters.

Chirac was largely elected with right-wing votes alone. Le Pen had no chance at all of being elected but, now, Sarkozy has plenty of chance to do so. Today Le Pen is still here, and moreover is so via the ideas of Sarkozy, which give Le Pen's a run for his money.

In this year's second round, there is no worthy candidate for the workers. After all, Sarkozy - of course - and Ségolène Royal, no more than him, would not raise their little finger to reslove the biggest problems facing the working class, which means unemployment, continual attacks on quality of life, and the serious crisis in housing. However, I hope with all my heart that Sarkozy is beaten, since his arrogance deserves nothing else, and his programme means nothing but goodies for the bosses, in particular the biggest businesses.

The measures he has proposed are the continuation of the policies of these last five years - the worst government we've had for a long time - that is to say, ramping up the pressure on the poor to give more and more to those who get rich at the expense of the rest of the population.

So I will be voting for Royal, and I call on all voters to do the same. But if I do this, it is simply in solidarity with all those among the masses who say they want "anyone but Sarkozy". I share their desire to defeat Sarkozy, but I however will say to them that Ségolène Royal will not improve the lot of the working class any more than Sarkozy.

Royal is just as much in the camp of capital, in the camp of the exploiters, financiers and those who lay off workers, as Sarkozy - they are good and loyal servants to them. One or the other will do nothing but serve the big bourgeoisie, as they have both done in all the governments they have ever served in. It is their common situation in the camp of the big bosses which makes it impossible that either will resolve the problems of the great mass of the population - as I said before, that means mass unemployment, a serious crisis in housing and a continual reduction of purchasing power.

The results of the first round - if you add up the left-wing and right-wing totals - would lead us to believe that Royal has only a small chance of winning in the second. But it is she who took on such risks! She chose a nothing campaign, looking towards the bosses just as much as towards the masses. Gifts drawn-up for the former, nothing but vague slogans for the latter. A campaign unable to raise enthusiasm among those not seeing social progress, a campaign which relies entirely on the anti-Sarkozy effect but which doesn't want to piss off the bosses.

But despair cannot be enough to raise hope.

So even if I unreservedly call for a vote for Ségolène Royal, I have no illusions in what her, the former ministers and the leaders of the Parti Socialiste will do if they get to power. I stand in absolute solidarity with all those who want to vote for Royal. But I will say to them that they will be quickly, and totally, disappointed, just as they were five years ago with Jospin's government. Ségolène Royal, if she is elected, will not be worse than Sarkozy, but neither will she be better! She may perhaps not take all the measures in favour of the élite that the right is doing at the moment - but under her rule, and even before the five year term is up, we will be seriously disillusioned, as we were with the last Socialist government.

We must impose our main demands upon her with sufficiently strong and united social movements, exactly as we should to Sarkozy. I have said all this in my campaign, but many voters thought that they had to use their vote in the first round for a cause they believed to be "useful". I say that they are fooling themselves. Their first round vote was not worthwhile. In the second round, I hope, it might serve some good to defeat Sarkozy, but it will not get rid of the pro-boss-class policies which either Sarkozy or Royal will apply.

It is however, for the sake of solidarity with the wishes of the - doubtless - majority of the camp of the working class, that which has always been and remains my camp, that I choose to vote for, and call for a vote for, Ségolène Royal.

But I am convinced that all workers must, whoever is elected, as quickly as possible get back onto the terrain of struggle.