No it’s not the political end of Nicolas Sarkozy. The local election results as discouraging as they are, they are neither the cause nor the origin of Sarkozy’s decline. If someone wanted to trace the present difficulties and future failures of Sarkozy one has to look back at his political campaign for the presidency.

In the TV debate before the second round for the presidency Sarkozy said in his opening statement that he wanted “to be a president of the republic who is committed first of all to results. I want results. No more talk, no more declarations of virtual rights but promises to the French of rights that will become a reality: Results.”

This is the basis and the starting point of Sarkozy’s end as a political reformer and a transformative force for a new France. The statement about “results” points to a misunderstanding about France’s source of discontent; France does not face a managerial problem but a philosophical one.

It seems that the French right has two kinds of politicians. The first one would be someone like Jacques Chirac. Slightly aware of the changes that are necessary to modernize the country and half-heartedly committed to make some reforms in the dark of the night. It’s the process where the government tries to pass a piece of legislation as quickly and with as little discussion and publicity. This model tragically failed, time and again, during Chirac’s presidency.

Then there is the second kind of French conservative politician, Nicolas Sarkozy. In this case the same kind of reforms is tried but this time in the full light of day and with some arguments being put forward. Although this second kind is an improvement over the first one, it does suffer in one fundamental way. The reasons and arguments put forward are of a very poor quality.  

The words usually one hears coming from the lips of the reformer politician are competitiveness, efficiency, purchasing power, and of course results. I don’t know many people moved by words like these; actually I don’t know any people like that. Have you ever being moved by a speech of an efficiency expert?

How exactly are competitiveness and efficiency to battle with words that do carry megatons of emotional weight and an intergenerational consciousness, like justice, solidarity and social cohesion?

If Sarkozy were to be successful he would have to create the grand narrative of a new France. He would have to make the French people see themselves and the world with new eyes. Ideas like that of justice, solidarity and social cohesion would have to be redefined or more accurately, regain their original meaning.

The truth of the matter is that the present state of affairs is not viable. It is as if France and most other European countries have legislated their way to decline and decadence. If there is any chance of hope – and at this point many are doubtful – the right in Europe must create a new compelling vision of a more prosperous and just society.

It’s not the work of a politician. Politicians are usually a lagging indicator. It would take a new and dynamic crop of thinkers, magazines and think tanks that would prepare the moral and intellectual ground for all the changes that are necessary.

The following excerpt from George Will’s column on the death of the conservative American figure Bill Buckley is very instructing:

Before there could be Ronald Reagan's presidency, there had to be Barry Goldwater’s candidacy. It made conservatism confident and placed the Republican Party in the hands of its adherents.
 
Before there could be Goldwater’s insurgency, there had to be National Review magazine. From the creative clutter of its Manhattan offices flowed the ideological electricity that powered the transformation of American conservatism from a mere sensibility into a fighting faith and a blueprint for governance.
 
Before there was National Review, there was Buckley, spoiling for a philosophic fight, to be followed, of course, by a flute of champagne with his adversaries. He was 29 when, in 1955, he launched National Review with the vow that it “stands athwart history, yelling Stop.” Actually, it helped Bill take history by the lapels, shake it to get its attention and then propel it in a new direction.

Well, before we have our euro-Reagans we are going to need our euro-Buckleys.