The new cabinet pulls in allies from the centre and right, despite left-wing parties winning France's election.

French President Emmanuel Macron has unveiled his new government almost three months after a snap general election delivered a hung parliament.

The long-awaited new line up, led by Prime Minister Michel Barnier, marks a decisive shift to the right, even though a left-wing alliance won most parliamentary seats.

Despite the partnership between Macron’s centrist party and those on the right, parliament remains fractured and will rely on the support of other parties to pass legislation.

    • DeadWorld@lemm.eeEnglish
      1·
      1 month ago

      It’s profitable to keep the left out of power as fascists will allow the rich to keep their wealth so long as they toe the party line and remain useful to the authority

      • JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.chEnglish
        0·
        1 month ago

        Well, profitable in the short term. If the lowly peons don’t have money because you took it all, they cant spend it on stuff from your factories and your profit goes down and everything grinds to a halt. of course you can try to sell it to other countries, which fucks over their economies and makes them more susceptible to populism/facism (well after an initial phase of excitement over those sweet cheap imports) and then it’s facism all around and everyone is fucked. You just need to plan it well enough so you’re on your private island/mars colony with robot butlers by that point

    • BakerBagel@midwest.socialEnglish
      1·
      1 month ago

      Because liberals in power would rather align with fascists than anyone to the left. Look at how US Democrats would rather debate the merits of executing abortion doctors than debate Medicare for All, how how UK Labour would rather argue whether transwomen should be allowed in public spaces rather than bringing back council housing. Corporate interests will always lead to fascism since it is the only way to continue selling the failed promises of capital

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      0·
      1 month ago

      It is the end result of capitalist exploitation. Liberal democracies cannot stop this process through voting.

      • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        0·
        1 month ago

        Least of all American Democracy. Even if we have the numbers, the system is abysmally unfair, always canted in the rightward direction. Even when the country elects the least right leaning option the country ratchets to the right. After Obama less dems were anti war. With Biden now more Democrats are for Republican style border control. Even winning is a losing strategy long term.

  • DeadWorld@lemm.eeEnglish
    2·
    1 month ago

    Macron proves that neoliberalism is nothing but the first step to fascism. This is actively subverting the democratic will if the people and I would hope France is willing do what it takes to adress this issue.

  • ShareMySims@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    1 month ago

    even though a left-wing alliance won most parliamentary seats.

    And yet, people will continue insisting that we can vote our way out of the rapid decline in to fascism… 🙄

      • mightyfoolish@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        1 month ago

        It’s extremely biased. It says that AlJazeera is biased because its “OPINION” pieces use loaded words against Israel. However, New York Times has the same bias but against Palestine (source) in their “NEWS” pieces and gets to be highly credible.

        Yes, media sources tend to be biased against something but the media bias fact checker is extremely biased. It is pointless.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          1 month ago

          I strongly suspect MBF is an actual Intelligence operation of the US Government.

          It makes all sense that to control the information that people access in this day and age of people being able to read news from just about anywhere using the Internet and when there is widespread awareness of Fake News and similar opinion making mechanisms, for a state to set up and fund an intelligence op disguised as a “well intentioned group” to act as an “independent” (always without the transparency, clear processes and supervision to guarantee said independence) gatekeeper to all that information and tell people which information sources can be trusted and which cannot.

          With such a scheme you can even get infiltrated agents in popular social media (such as moderators in high traffic places where anybody can be a moderator) to leverage that “well intentioned group’s” image of “independence” to get both soft (advice bot) and hard information control mechanics in place (post rejection) determined solely by that single gatekeeper’s decisions.

          It doesn’t even take a conspiracy, just a handful of individuals and some careful talk and image management to sway well intentioned people who aren’t exactly trained in data analysis or counter-propaganda to “use these nice and honest people to protect our readers from fake news” - people seriously understimate just how much influence a person who is paid to spend all day gaining influence in open groups, who has done it long enough to be experienced at it, who has zero ethics or honesty and who has access to the level of resources a nation state can provide, can gain and then leverage.

          • GelatinGeorge@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            1 month ago

            That makes grim sense, actually. I hadn’t bothered to check the bots sources in the slightest, so thank you both for taking the time to reply.