obvious political and institutional shortcomings with its considerable successes in these other areas.
|
France's postwar revival was due, this study shows, to the surprising tenacity with which leading French planners, technocrats, and policymakers pursued a national strategy of recovery, one that was formed in the crucible of French politics in the first three years following the war and that provided a blueprint for both domestic and foreign policy. The institutional weaknesses of the Republic as it was reconstructed after the war offered opportunities for maneuver and innovation in policymaking. Thus, the lack of an effective governing structure, the absence of coherent argumentation in much of French political life, and the apparently insurmountable divisions among ideologically charged sectors of the population led innovative planners to champion technocratic, ostensibly apolitical solutions to the host of difficult problems facing the nation. This new managerial elite was made up of youngish, cosmopolitan insiders, some of France's leading technical and financial civil servants, who in the confused atmosphere of the postwar years were uniquely situated in government to effect policy. These were men who had traveled, had studied abroad, and whose outlook on economics and national strategy had been transformed by their experiences in the war. No longer, they concluded, could France remain isolated from the world economy and the harsh realities of international competition, as their Third Republic mentors had believed. Swiftly and quietly, these new "technocrats" began to lay the groundwork for French recovery along the most pragmatic lines possible. They engineered what I have identified as a "planning consensus," a compromise among political, economic, and administrative interests that delineated a plan for national recovery and that could be defended with arguments based on efficiency, rationality, and national interest. The Monnet Plan of 1946 was the preeminent example of this kind of state problem solving. As chapter I argues, the Plan was a clever trompe l'oeil, an attempt to draw from the confusion of French politics a working consensus on reconstruction. To it may be attributed a uniquely French administrative style in which the state built consensus from the top down without resolving, or even disturbing, the political hubbub and tumult erupting in the streets of French cities and on the pages of France's postwar newspapers.
|
The planning consensus, however, was not limited to domestic politics, but had a distinct utility in international relations as well. In the course of this decade, French elites learned that they could frame their international objectives in the language of planning in order to build a
|
|