3 ms·

Note that that clause was added to the constitution as a consequence of De Gaulle's military coup in 1958. The coup is what created the extremely strong French

Note that that clause was added to the constitution as a consequence of De Gaulle's military coup in 1958. The coup is what created the extremely strong French presidency.

ArnoVW 3y ago
And that it has been used dozens of times since, by both sides of the aisle.
- estebank 3y ago
  I find it funny to use "both sides of the aisle" in the context of the French political system. > Usage of the term "aisle" comes from the United States Congress. In the Senate, desks are arranged in the chamber in a semicircular pattern and the desks are divided by a wide central aisle. By tradition, Democrats sit on the right of the center aisle (as viewed from the presiding officer's chair) while Republicans sit on the left. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisle_(political_term) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisle_(political_term)
  - odiroot 3y ago
    Doesn't it actually come from UK houses of parliament?
    - estebank 3y ago
      From the linked Wikipedia entry > a similar phrase used in countries operating under the Westminster system, is "crossing the floor"
  - gilleain 3y ago
    Sure, and the whole 'left' and 'right' system comes from 18th century French politics :) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political...
  - ArnoVW 3y ago
    I'll admit I was lazy and did not want to look how to write "both sides of the political spectrum". Don't know who voted down, but on the off chance that it helps arrange your gripe, here's the list of statesmen and their use of 49.3 (since 1958) Michel Rocard 28 "left" Élisabeth Borne 11 "center" Raymond Barre 8 "center" Jacques Chirac 8 "right" Édith Cresson 8 "left" Pierre Mauroy 7 "left" Georges Pompidou 6 "right" Manuel Valls 6 "right" Laurent Fabius 4 "left" .. Rocard was in power 3 years, and Borne only 14 months, so if one extrapolates naively she will eventually arrive in top position. But 1) we're not voting on pensions every day and 2) I think one has to admit that the political climate has changed since 1993 and the current opposition does not make a super constructive partner. In the end, the country has to move forward. That's precisely why 49.3 exists.
sofixa 3y ago
And was added to avoid the chaos and instability of the Third and Fourth Republics which were parliamentary but had big difficulties establishing lasting consensus, and thus had most governments lasting barely a few months.
- DiogenesKynikos 3y ago
  So the military took power, installed a general, and had the constitution changed to allow the president to force through legislation without a parliamentary majority.
  - sofixa 3y ago
    The military didn't take power, there was a coup attempt that failed. > allow the president to force through legislation without a parliamentary majority. Unless there is a motion of no confidence which can be called immediately after such an act, and if it passes with a simple majority, the legislation doesn't pass and the government falls. Therefore it allows the president's government to force through laws only if there aren't enough members of parliament to vote for them, but not against them.
    - DiogenesKynikos 3y ago
      The 1958 coup was successful. You might be confusing it with the failed 1961 coup. In 1958, the military in Algeria (then still part of France) rebelled against the government, and successfully invaded Corsica. They threatened to invade metropolitan France unless the government stepped down, which it did. They then installed Charles de Gaulle in power and rewrote the constitution. As French Wikipedia notes, "il s'agit du dernier coup d'État réussi en France" ("it's the last successful coup d'état in France").[0] > Therefore it allows the president's government to force through laws only if there aren't enough members of parliament to vote for them, but not against them. It forces parliament to choose between deposing the government or allowing the law to go through. There's no option to simply reject the law, as would be the case in most normal democracies. 0. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%89tat_du_13_mai_1958 https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%89tat_du_13_mai_1...

Note that that clause was added to the constitution as a consequence of De Gaulle's military coup in 1958. The coup is what created the extremely strong French presidency.

ArnoVW 3y ago

And that it has been used dozens of times since, by both sides of the aisle.

estebank 3y ago
I find it funny to use "both sides of the aisle" in the context of the French political system. > Usage of the term "aisle" comes from the United States Congress. In the Senate, desks are arranged in the chamber in a semicircular pattern and the desks are divided by a wide central aisle. By tradition, Democrats sit on the right of the center aisle (as viewed from the presiding officer's chair) while Republicans sit on the left. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisle_(political_term) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisle_(political_term)
- odiroot 3y ago
  Doesn't it actually come from UK houses of parliament?
  - estebank 3y ago
    From the linked Wikipedia entry > a similar phrase used in countries operating under the Westminster system, is "crossing the floor"
- gilleain 3y ago
  Sure, and the whole 'left' and 'right' system comes from 18th century French politics :) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political...
- ArnoVW 3y ago
  I'll admit I was lazy and did not want to look how to write "both sides of the political spectrum". Don't know who voted down, but on the off chance that it helps arrange your gripe, here's the list of statesmen and their use of 49.3 (since 1958) Michel Rocard 28 "left" Élisabeth Borne 11 "center" Raymond Barre 8 "center" Jacques Chirac 8 "right" Édith Cresson 8 "left" Pierre Mauroy 7 "left" Georges Pompidou 6 "right" Manuel Valls 6 "right" Laurent Fabius 4 "left" .. Rocard was in power 3 years, and Borne only 14 months, so if one extrapolates naively she will eventually arrive in top position. But 1) we're not voting on pensions every day and 2) I think one has to admit that the political climate has changed since 1993 and the current opposition does not make a super constructive partner. In the end, the country has to move forward. That's precisely why 49.3 exists.

sofixa 3y ago

And was added to avoid the chaos and instability of the Third and Fourth Republics which were parliamentary but had big difficulties establishing lasting consensus, and thus had most governments lasting barely a few months.

DiogenesKynikos 3y ago
So the military took power, installed a general, and had the constitution changed to allow the president to force through legislation without a parliamentary majority.
- sofixa 3y ago
  The military didn't take power, there was a coup attempt that failed. > allow the president to force through legislation without a parliamentary majority. Unless there is a motion of no confidence which can be called immediately after such an act, and if it passes with a simple majority, the legislation doesn't pass and the government falls. Therefore it allows the president's government to force through laws only if there aren't enough members of parliament to vote for them, but not against them.
  - DiogenesKynikos 3y ago
    The 1958 coup was successful. You might be confusing it with the failed 1961 coup. In 1958, the military in Algeria (then still part of France) rebelled against the government, and successfully invaded Corsica. They threatened to invade metropolitan France unless the government stepped down, which it did. They then installed Charles de Gaulle in power and rewrote the constitution. As French Wikipedia notes, "il s'agit du dernier coup d'État réussi en France" ("it's the last successful coup d'état in France").[0] > Therefore it allows the president's government to force through laws only if there aren't enough members of parliament to vote for them, but not against them. It forces parliament to choose between deposing the government or allowing the law to go through. There's no option to simply reject the law, as would be the case in most normal democracies. 0. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%89tat_du_13_mai_1958 https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%89tat_du_13_mai_1...