"The French right in Europe? It's a very French vision of politics!" laughs Klaus Welle. Major guest of the evening, Édouard Philippe can hardly hide his ambitions for the presidential election of 2027. As if he wanted to place himself under the patronage of Cardinal Richelieu – whose portrait sits in the center of the amphitheater – the mayor of Le Havre exclaims a bit provocatively: "I think I can say that the cardinal was not left-wing!", before adding that "the right must embody power and strength".
" READ ALSO Immigration upsets and strengthens the European right
It faces a packed amphitheater alongside philosopher Perrine Simon-Nahum, former European Affairs Minister Noëlle Lenoir, and Italian historian Giovanni Orsina. Their common objective: to demonstrate that the victory of the right in the European elections is inevitable. None of them imagines a European Parliament dominated by anything other than the right. But the recent rise of the national-conservative right in Italy, Sweden, and tomorrow perhaps in Austria is once again weakening the moderate right.
All participants in the debate pose as defenders of liberal democracy. The 2024 election would, according to them, be an opportunity to give it a new impetus. Former European Affairs Minister Noëlle Lenoir worries about our "habituation to political violence". She regrets to see liberal democracy weakened first by the "far left" which questions the very legitimacy of the election, then by populism which fuels the divide between rulers and governed.
Reducing the right to its conservative essence is damaging and dangerous.
Édouard Philippe
"Is the liberal right submitting to populism?" asks Perrine Simon-Nahum. Concerned about his former political family, which he fears to see bridges established between The Republicans and the National Rally, Édouard Philippe replies and ironically: "Is it the Republic that will eat the extreme right? Or the far right that will eat the Republic?". Populism would eat away at democracy: it would be the great pathology of our decade. More precisely, the philosopher Perrine Simon-Nahum recalls that populism is based on the purity of the people, the permanent criticism of the elites, mass clientelism.
Its conservative matrix specific to the European right revolves around "eternal truths" and "sustainability". Édouard Philippe repeats: "reducing the right to its conservative essence is damaging and dangerous". Her ties with the far right could only disqualify her. He does not reject the idea of "cultural insecurity", which he believes is a logical consequence of the rapid globalisation that Europe has been experiencing for twenty years.
"It thrives on the rhetoric of frustration," says Noëlle Lenoir. However, differences appear on the side of Giovani Orsina, so far discreet. He refuses to see in Giorgia Meloni a far-right woman with exacerbated populism. "It has populist elements but it is not populist," insists the Italian historian.
"Marine Le Pen's far right is social-nationalism"
Klaus Welle
Former Secretary General of the European Parliament Klaus Welle details his definition of the far right; A current that he considers right and left. The one embodied by Marine Le Pen is a "social-nationalism" coupled with a permanent appeal to the people of which she claims to be the spokesman. Word order matters. Noëlle Lenoir endorses François Mitterand's formula: "Nationalism is war".
So, should we normalize the far right? Should it be "de-demonized"? No, says Giovanni Orsina. Above all, legitimate demands for security must be met. Rebuilding a strong bond between citizens and their representatives is vital for liberal democracy to continue. Talking with the far right would therefore not be an ideological crime, but a necessity if the objective is to strengthen the legitimacy of liberal democracy.
" READ ALSO Visit of Giorgia Meloni to the Elysee: "On the migration issue, Giorgia Meloni and Emmanuel Macron are not so far apart"
Faced with the "obvious right-wing" of our society, the former prime minister believes that only the search for a "point of balance" between the presidential majority and Les Républicains would prevent a radicalization of the right. All agree on the idea that the right can only be victorious if it is interested in all subjects: whether security or climate. The audience is won over to their cause: the applause is fed. The liberal right has understood this. It has no choice but to take up certain themes such as security, immigration, demography or purchasing power. Its survival is at stake.