Faire Confiance: "Making" trust towards public institutions in France

Bohdan Khovruk

December 31, 2024

The level of trust in government is usually declining as a result of the economic crisis and corruption scandals in the government. Trust in government institutions is an essential part of the functioning of any democracy. It is very important to keep being a legitimate authority to promote democracy. Conflicts and instability of power often happen because of people's lack of trust in the authorities. Level of trust in a country is a result of the historical development of that country. The history of France is very broad and there have been many historical events that could affect the trust of people today. French citizens are always ready to protest or go to strike, because the French culture has a high level of political engagement and they are willing to fight for a better future, and it depends on trust towards public institutions. What the level of trust is in France and how have the crises of the last 15 years within the EU impact the level of trust in France. Trust towards political institutions is going down because of global crises or important events where political institutions are incapable of resolving problems. Then, people tend to vote for radical politics with expectations that it will bring stable policy.

France has a very rich history. The French Revolution in 1787 and its aftermath belong among the most studied historical events in Europe. History of France and its events influenced the whole of Europe and how we see it today. But not everyone has a picture of what France was like before 1787. Before the French Revolution, the ancien régime reigned in the country. The name came only after the Revolution. Because people realized how dark their past was (World History Encyclopedia,2024). In that time, there was absolute inequality and strict laws.For example, it was especially difficult for the middle class of people, and the poor. Because of that they paid heavy taxes, when the upper classes paid less or were exempted from taxes completely. (World History Encyclopedia,2024) From this point of view we can conclude that there was a strong hierarchy in the country. Moreover, the power of the king did not let anyone get close to him, and no one person had influence on the political power. Therefore, there was no trust in the power, because ordinary people were dissatisfied by the king's actions. Moore and Tilly study the necessary elements for reaching a democratic society. For Moore, the development towards modernity is dependent upon the nature of social conflicts, economic growth, and violence. Violence is a major part for achieving any modern society. Modernization is a process where there are so many conflicts and only revolutions or agreement between people resolve it. The bourgeoisie played a very important role in the modernization and democratization of the states because they fought against the feudal hierarchy and asked for reforms. The similar interest of the middle class of people and poor class destroyed the system that was in France before the French revolution. It helped to redistribute power which afterwards led to democratization in France. Violence was the only way to overthrow the monarchy and reduce inequality between people.

The economy in France became worse and worse closer to the French Revolution. Because of the hierarchy that was in that time, there was a very strong tension between social classes of people. And the different social classes were standing up for what they wanted to change. The French Revolution of 1787 was an event where violence played a major role. A lot of blood was spilled for what was desired. The French Revolution is called unsuccessful by many scholars if we talk about what changed immediately after it. Because Bonaparte came, who again established an authoritarian regime, and brought a lot of instability in both politics and economic ways. There were high taxes that were used for the army in France. Bonaparte had a great desire to take over the whole of Europe, so special attention was given to the army and to maintaining it. But we can definitely say that they influenced French and world history in the future. Because this revolution definitely changed the politics of the country and the absolute monarchy was overthrown. There was a great hope for equality between social classes and the influence of people on politics but Bonaparte did not give this possibility (Britannica,2024). However, Moore and Tilly say that violence was necessary during inequality and hierarchy that was in France. King was losing his power more and more when the aristocracy gained more support. This balance of power slightly changed that helped to do revolutions 1787 in France. The redistribution of power led to transformation politics in France. Where the King fully lost his power after the Revolution so it brought more stability and an attempt to equality between people. It proves that only through violence possible to make changes in pre-modern society. But these attempts will not always be successful. Moreover, it shows that democracy is a regime that should be protected. Authoritarian politicians should not be allowed to enter politics, because in other cases any efforts that even happened through violence will be in vain. Should be not only a high level of trust in politicians, but we have to actively protect the democracy that there is nowadays from authoritarians. Collins writes that kings tried to make centralized power in France long before the French Revolution. Centralized power is one of the factors of the modern state. Because under these conditions the whole country is ruled as a whole, not separately by regions. Monarchs wanted to take control of the whole country so that other regions would not be influenced by others. The bureaucracy that existed at the time helped with this very well in controlling everything that was possible, for example, controlling taxes. However, the doubt about the legitimacy of kings in France led to the French Revolution.(Collins,2024) Because people should rule the country and choose a leader. Then people can push their interests and act all together. After the revolution in France, when the monarchy was overthrown and people had to rule and elect, it was necessary to establish human rights. Accordingly, institutions were established to protect the rights of citizens and these institutions had to respond to the needs and desires of people. The legitimacy and people's trust in politics had to grow after the French Revolution because people had to rule the country without power passing from hand to hand. Moreover, after the revolution in France and after Bonaparte, the identity in France increased. At that time France was considered one of the strongest countries so any interference from other countries could not be. There was no desire to interfere in French territory, because it was dangerous . It means that the French ruled independently and they could pay attention to reforms and laws in their country to improve the stability and economy in the country. To sum up, every country that wants to have democratic society should come through a difficult and long time period. The time and effort is basic for democracy, because basically we have to fight for it. There are necessary elements for creating a modern state. Violence and social conflicts are the basis for transition from pre state society to modern state. Social conflict is an important stage for democratization. Because of it people can find compromises that will be suitable for all of them. The French Revolution in 1787 shows how it works in practice. Pre-modern society in France is about full inequality and strong hierarchy where it was difficult to live for the middle class of people. So, through violence and hurt people in France achieved political transformation and redistribution of power. The violence played an important role for political changes. The French revolution was a major event that influenced the whole world even if it was an unsuccessful revolution. In consequence it led to democratization that we can see now in modern society. French history shows that people have a high level of political engagement and they expect more from politicians. If they distrust politics, people will openly show it by protests. Moreover, the basis of the modern state is centralized power and France has been doing this for a very long time without interference from other countries. That allowed them to focus on identity and promote their values which unites people in France even more.

Social conditions that prevailed during the time of the formation of the modern sate in turn impact the type of political culture that evolves in a country. Almond and Verba define 3 types of political culture (Almond & Verba, 1966). The parochial type of culture is where people have no interest in politics and do not participate in politics because they focus more on family issues. It may lead to authoritarian politics, where people will not control what the government is doing. Subject culture has interest in politics but they usually do not participate and accept what the government is doing. When participating in culture, participate in politics with understanding what is going on in politics and tend to influence political actions. But in reality, it is difficult to detect what type of culture a country is. So, usually countries have mixed types of culture. France is no exception with subject-active culture. The country has passed through important events in the past that have influenced the type of its culture. These events reflect people's trust in politics and how it is expressed. Civil culture is the most suitable for democratic and stable society. Because it strikes a balance between an active and a subjective culture. These two elements provide citizens activity in politics and also recognizes the legitimacy of leaders. Legitimacy and trust in leaders is very important for democracy because it creates stability. Citizens recognize the state and listen to it, but they are also active and express their ideas and desires. Moreover, in civic culture there are associations that play an important role in maintaining trust and cooperation in the country. In such conditions the state will work in favor of citizens where policies will be carried out effectively achieving the set goals. But in turn, the state must respond to the needs of citizens. The French Revolution was a time when people started to think about equality and freedom. People wanted to achieve this goal and tried to actively participate in political action. It was a process of democratization that affected not only France but also other countries in Europe. After this, it became easier for people in France to express their position on politics. The realization that people can take the country into their own hands has influenced the culture in France until today. But it also shows how politically unstable the country is and the changes are very sudden and sometimes instantly. We can describe French citizens as tolerant people who accept the actions of the state, but only to a certain point when people stop tolerating and push their opinions on politics. Historically, this country can be called the nation of strikes. This is how they express their opinion and distrust of political leaders.

The level of involvement in France is very high historically. Because to achieve participation in politics they gave a lot of effort and went through violence in the past. France shows a high level of participation in elections and a desire to show their opinion politically. However, very often this opinion is expressed through violence than through peaceful agreements. The temper that belongs to the French people can lead to bad consequences. Although the country is democratic, such character features can break the democracy in the country at any second. But the trust of people in political leaders depends on events which in the opinion of people were the mistake of the state. The world economic crisis in 2008 undermined the trust of citizens because the state was not ready for it and was unable to stabilize the economy in the country. The same situation was during covid-19. As the statistics of Eurofound(2022) shows, the confidence in the French government fell not immediately but only in 2022, because people doubted the correct actions of the state only with time looking back. A lot of people lost their jobs and moreover there were a lot of questions about the health care system not only in France but in the EU as a whole. Overall, Almond and Verba describe different types of political culture, but also mentioned that in reality, we always face mixed types. For democracy, perhaps the best is subject and participative at the same time. Then it will be a stable culture where people will express their opinions openly and participate in decision making. Such a political culture in France. However, the French act very quickly and decisively, very often by revolt. We can call this type of participation in politics unstable and is a threat to democracy. Although the French show a high level of involvement in elections which is a very positive value and with a desire to be visible.

Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum define democracy in a slightly different way (Sen, 1999; Nussbaum, 2011). They identify democracy through the opportunities that are available to people. For example, the opportunity for development and the level of inequality in a country. Access to education or a heart care system. For them, democracy is not about elections. They are more focused on people being able to have the right to choose and to participate in political decisions. They point out equality, which is very important for people to strive for a better life. Because in such conditions they will be able to realize their life much better. And in general the country will grow much faster and more efficiently. The country can achieve a high level of democracy in such a case. French history is very broad. It has very many generations which somehow were different from each other. However, there are character features that have been maintained, namely the protests in the country. The economic development in France is growing to this day. However, the economic crises that happened in the country has caused problems that are related to the trust in the institutions in the country.

France takes a high place in the quality of life ranking, but the low level of trust in political institutions tells a different story. The economic stability that France has does not allow for a high level of trust in political institutions for other reasons. These reasons are related to crises in the country that can face the country at an unexpected moment. For example, the crisis in Europe in 2008 or Covid 19 in 2020. In case of covid, the country is still trying to make up for what it could not achieve during this period. Security is also an important factor for the level of trust. For example, the terrorist attacks in 2015 significantly reduced trust in France, however, after a while the trust returned to the previous level. To sum it up, trust in France is very unstable and there are many factors that affect the level of trust in the country. However, this is mainly due to events where people feel excluded and unable to influence political decisions. The culture of France shows that it strives to participate in political decisions. But it is not always possible to do so when there are events where decisions are made without taking people's opinions into account. Therefore, if political leaders in France listen to people's opinions in times of crisis, the level of trust will only grow. However, whether it is worth listening to the opinions of the public in difficult periods is a very complex question and it will need further research on this topic.

Bibliography

Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1963). The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Britannica, T. (2024, September 29). French Revolution. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/French-Revolution Collins, James B, “The state in early modern France” (1995) https://archive.org/details/stateinearlymode0000coll/page/n3/mode/2up Eurofound ‘’Fifth round of the Living, working and COVID-19 e-survey: Living in a new era of uncertainty’’(2022) https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/en/publications/2022/fifth-round-living-working-and-covid-19-e-survey-living-new-era-uncertainty INSEE https://www.insee.fr/ INED https://www.ined.fr/en/ Moore, B. (1966). Social origins of dictatorship and democracy : Lord and peasant in the making of the modern world. Publisher Netchev, S. (2024, September 16). The Three Estates of Pre-revolutionary France. World History Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.worldhistory.org/image/19448/the-three-estates-of-pre-revolutionary-france/ Norris P, Inglehart R. Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge University Press; 2019. Nussbaum, M. (2011). Creating Capabilities: The human development approach. Belknap Press, The Imprint of the Harvard University Press. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press. SUTHERLAND, DONALD "Ancien Régime ." Europe, 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World. . Retrieved October 14, 2024 from Encyclopedia.com. THE SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX https://www.socialprogress.org/search?query=france Tilly, C. (1985). War making and state making as organized crime. In: P. Evans, D.Rueschemeyer, &T. Skocpol (Eds.) Bringing the state back in. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.169 – 186.